Resolution Number 06-11-21-02' RESOLUTION NO. 06-11-21-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN
CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE APPEAL OF OMAR
AND CAROLYN GONZALEZ REGARDING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 06-01 (ZOOMARS MINI -FARM PROJECT)
WHEREAS, applicant Omar and Carolyn Gonzalez filed an use permit
application and related land use entitlements for expansion of use of a mini -farm at the
location of 31791 Los Rios District, San Juan Capistrano, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 06-9-12-2
conditionally approving Conditional Use Permit 06-01 for the mini -farm project and
making various findings, including the project's consistency with the City's General Plan,
and
WHEREAS, the applicant filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission
approval by specifically appealing conditions 18 & 26 set forth in Resolution 06-9-12-2,
and
WHEREAS, this appeal is limited only to a review of the Planning Commission's
' imposition of conditions 18 and 26 on the project, and
WHEREAS, the City Council held an appeal hearing in review of the applicant's
appeal on November 7, 2006, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has fully considered all testimony given during the
hearing and documentation presented to the City Council during the hearing, and
WHEREAS, the Council at the close of the public hearing by motion voted to
uphold the appeal, providing reasons, and directing staff to prepare an appropriate
resolution confirming the Council's actions,
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council finds and determines that the applicant's
appeal as to condition 18, as imposed by the Planning Commission, be hereby upheld
based upon the following findings and conclusions:
1. The Planning Commission's conclusion (Condition 18) to delete the
applicant's proposal to construct a four foot high fence on River Street is reversed, and
therefore, the Council approves the River Street fence element as proposed by the
applicant in its land use application.
' (a) The Council does not agree with staffs interpretation that the construction of
the four foot fence along the mid -line of River Street (a private street) would
conflict with item 2b, page 10 of the Los Rios Specific Plan. Sections 2a and
Page 1 of 3 11/21/2006
2b emphasize that the intent of the street component of the Specific Plan is to --
change the primary access to the Los Rios Historic District from Los Rios
Street to Paseo Adelanto, such that the construction of the new Paseo
Adelanto road improvements would allow River Street ingress/egress access
into the mini -farm and Ito nursery properties from Paseo Adelanto. The
Paseo Adelanto road construction included the construction of two access
driveways from Paseo Adelanto onto the Ito nursery property. Access from
Paseo Adelanto directly into the Ito property is generally consistent with the
main intent of the Specific Plan which was to shift traffic from Los Rios Street
onto Paseo Adelanto. It is therefore Council's conclusion that a four foot
fence on River Street would be consistent with the Plan because of the other
access possibilities offered by the Paseo Adelanto road construction.
(b) Staffs interpretation that a four foot fence on River Street would adversely
affect River Street as an historic site is subjective and not persuasive
factually. Council does not agree that a small fence of this nature would
significantly affect an aesthetic view shed. The small size of the fence and
its composition simply would not amount to anything other than a minor
change to the existing view corridor along River Street. The historical
documents referred to in the staff report discuss the importance of the River
Street area as an Indian footpath. The fence proposal retains the rural
footpath feature of this street area.
(c) The information and testimony presented at the Council hearing does
demonstrate that the fence would serve a useful public safety purpose of
protecting children and adults who visit the mini -farm to experience the
variety of animals and small train operation.
(d) Staff presented information during the hearing regarding several other issues:
the fence on or near a public drainage line easement within River Street
would not impair the City's ability to access the line for maintenance
purposes; concern expressed as to impairment of the use of River Street as a
private street based upon private easement rights is beyond the scope of the
consideration of the zoning issues in this appeal, and is a matter for
private adjudication; the license agreement referred to was only intended to
authorize the city to enter upon private property for the purpose of completing
road asphalt improvements in order to complete the construction of Paseo
Adelanto road improvements.
2. Council concludes that the fence proposal has not been shown to conflict with
the Los Rios Specific Plan, nor is there any evidence to indicate that a small
fence of this nature conflicts with the City's General Plan. The applicant's fence
proposal is compatible with surrounding properties because it will promote
pedestrian safety in the neighborhood and adequate vehicular access to
neighborhood properties is available through the use of Paseo Adelanto.
Page 2 of 3 11/21/2006
3. The appeal of the color palette condition 26 was resolved by the City Council in a
separate motion finding that the proposed color palette was appropriate and no
further review was needed.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 215` day of November, 2006.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO )
DAVID M. SWERDLIN, MAYOR
W
) ss.
I, MARGARET R. MONAHAN, appointed City Clerk of the City of San Juan Capistrano, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution No. 06-11-21-02 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Juan
Capistrano at a Regular meeting thereof, held the 2151 day of November 2006, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUJNJCIL MEMBER:
ABSENT/ CAD NCIL MEMBER:
Hart, Bathgate and Soto
Allevato and Mayor Swerdlin
None
Page 3 of 3
11/21/2006