Res P-00-36RESOLUTION NO. P- 00-36
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA
DENYING MCUP 99-09
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 275-270-19
WHEREAS, MCUP 99-09 submitted by McCullough-Ames Development, applicant,
requests a Minor Conditional Use Permit to add eight (8) lights to an existing t ~t
on a residential lot in the Rural Residential B (RR-B) zone. The subject property is located
at 15575 Paseo Del Arroyo; and
WHEREAS, on Apd125, 2000, the City Council held a duly advertised public headng
to solicit comments from the public, both pro and con, relative to this application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Poway
as follows:
Section 1: The City Council finds that Minor Conditional Use Permit 99-09 is
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California E Quality Act,
pursuant to Section 15301(a), Class 1, in that it is a minor alteration to an existing single-
family resid 3 electrical equipment.
Section 2: The findings in accordance with Section '17.48.070 of the Poway
Municipal Code for MCUP 99-09 to add eight lights to an existing tennis court on a
residential lot at 15575 Paseo Del Arroyo in the RR-B : all be made as follows:
The proposed location, size, design and operating characteristics of the
proposed use is not in accordance with the title and purpose of the Poway
Municipal Code, the purpose of the Rural Residential B zone in which the
site is located, the City General Plan, and the development policies and
standards of the City, as outlined in items B, E, G and J below, because the
lighting of the tennis court would create lighting, glare, and noise impacts to
the neighborhood which detract from the apl; ~ the neighborhood
and adversely affect the welfare of the residents.
The location, size, design, and operating ch :the proposed use
will not be compatible with and will adversely affect or be materially
detrimental to adjacent uses, residents, buildings, structures or natural
The location of the proposed tennis court lighting will create a
negative visual impact :ling properties and roadways due to the
topographical ch ;the properties and the proximity of the court
to said neighboring properties. The proximity of'the court to neighboring
homes also results in incompatibility from noise associated with the night
t' ~ the court.
Resolution No. P- 0 0- 3 6
Page 2
D=
G=
Ht
The harmony in scale, bulk, coverage, and density of the project'
with adjacent uses, because the 8 light standards are limited in number, and
they are of small size in relation to the project site (a 2 acre lot).
There are public facilities,
~ u! 31e.
There will be harmful effects upon desirable neighborhood characteristics
because the lighting will be visible from the surrounding properties and will
therefore create visual impacts to residents of those properties. And, the
Iting from night use of the court will not be compatible with nearby
residential properties.
The project will not increase traffic. Therefore, the generation of traffic will
not adversely impact the capacity and physical character of surrounding
streets and/or the circular' : of the General Plan.
The location of the court lighting does not allow adequate separation from
adjacent properties to provide lighting which is compatible with said
neighboring properties. Therefore, the site is not suitable for the type and
intensity of use or development which is proposed.
There will be no significant harmful effects upon Iai quality and
natural because the lights would be located on an existing
developed property and they are exempt from CEQA.
There are no other relevant negative impacts of the proposed use that
cannot be mitigated.
The proximity of the lighting to surrounding properties will create visual
impacts from the addition of light during the night, and the night 1'
the court will create noise impacts to nearby residents. The lighting would
conflict with the rural character of the neighborhood in conflict with Policy
of the General Plan Community Design Element. The lighting would shine
on the neighboring property in conflict with Poway Municipal Code Section
17.30.020.C, and in conflict with Strategy 3 of Policy I of the Community
Design Element of the Poway General Plan. Therefore, the impacts as
described above and the proposed location, size, design, and operating
characteristics of the proposed use and the conditions under which it would
be operated -I will be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or imp in the vicinity
or be contrary to the adopted General Plan.
-- Resolution No. P- 00- 36
Page 3
The proposed conditional use will not comply with each of the applicable
provisions of Section 17.48.070 of the Poway Municipal Code, as noted
above under items A, B, E, G, and J.
Section 3: The City Council hereby denies MCUP 99-09 to allow tennis court
lighting at an existing single-family residence at 15575 Paseo Del Arroyo in the RR-B zone.
The conditions of the ad 3proval of the tennis court itself (MDRA
99-183 issued January 7, 2000) remain in effect.
Within 30 days of the date of this action the applicant shall remove the poles
intended for the light fixtures, except as they act to support the approved
fence and are no higher than 10 feet.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Poway,
State of California, at a reg ..3 this 25th day of April 2000.
ATTEST:
Lo '-Anne Peoples, City
Michael
Resolution No. P- 0 0- 3 6
Page 4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
I, Lori Anne Peoples, City Clerk of the City of Poway, do'hereby certify, under the
penalty of perjury, that the foregoing Resolution No. P- 00- 36 was duly adopted by the
City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on the 25th day of April 2000, and that
it was so adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Emery, Higginson, Cafagna
NOES: Gol dby
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Rexford
nne Peoples,
City of Poway