Loading...
Res 22-023RESOLUTION NO. 22-023 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL (APL) 22-001 OF MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION (MDRA) 21- 023 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 275-032-04 WHEREAS, MDRA 21-023 is a proposal to construct a 6,670 square -foot single-family residence with an attached 431-square-foot garage to be used as a residential care facility (hospice) on a 1.02-acre lot at 16752 Espola Road, in the Rural Residential C (RR-C) zone ("Project"); WHEREAS, MDRA 21-023 was approved by City staff on February 15, 2022; WHEREAS, Section 2.20.20 of the Poway Municipal Code (PMC) provides for the appeal of administrative decisions, and on February 25, 2022, an appeal was filed regarding the approval of MDRA 21-023 ("Appeal"); and WHEREAS, on May 17, 2022, the City Council at a public meeting considered comments from the public, both pro and con, relative to this appeal, including written materials and oral presentations by both the appellants and the applicant, and incorporates all the Agenda Report for the May 17, 2022 public hearing on the appeal and all materials attached hereto into this resolution by reference. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Poway as follows: SECTION 1: A request for City Council appeal of an administrative decision itself is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), but the denial of the appeal and final approval of the Project is exempt from CEQA under both the Class 3 and Class 32 exemptions, as set forth in CEQA Guidelines sections 15303 and 15332. SECTION 2: The Appeal of the approval of MDRA 21-023 is denied. In support of the City Council's denial of the Appeal, the City Council incorporates by reference all the factual determinations and findings made by City Staff in its original approval of MDRA 21-023, as well as of City Staff's responses to the Appeal set forth in the Agenda Report for the April 17, Appeal hearing, as if fully set forth herein. The City Council also makes the following further findings in support of its denial of the Appeal: A. The design review process for this Project recognized and implemented the interdependence of land values and aesthetics to the benefit of the City. The Project has been designed to be architecturally compatible and in scale with the surrounding residential development. In terms of scale, the Project is only a one-story facility and follows applicable lot coverage and setback requirements. In terms of aesthetics, the Project has been designed so the proposed exterior building materials will be similar and compatible with the surrounding residential development. Its landscape plan and fence provide sufficient screening of its parking facilities to minimize visual impacts. Moreover, the Project is conditioned to remove its north driveway to reduce views of its parking spaces. The Project maintains a high level of on -site parking above the minimum level recommended in order to avoid the risk of Project -related street parking. The Project includes a privacy fence requested by the area neighbors adjacent to Resolution No. 22-023 Page 2 the neighborhood pedestrian and equestrian trail to maintain the value of this neighborhood amenity. There is no evidence in the record that the Project would negatively impact property values, and the only evidence is from the Applicant, which indicates the no such impacts have occurred from its operation of a similar facility in San Diego County. B. The Project encourages the orderly and harmonious appearance of structures and property within the City along with associated facilities, such as but not limited to signs, landscaping, parking areas and streets. The Project has been designed to follow the City's sign ordinance and landscaping ordinance. The Project has been designed so the proposed exterior building materials will be similar and compatible with the surrounding residential development. The Project provides ample on -site parking above the parking levels needed for the Project's average daily trips and is able to accommodate parking on a maximum peak trip day in order to avoid the risk of Project -related parking on the street. To maximize the harmonious appearance of the Project and its interaction with the local street, the Project is conditioned to remove its north driveway and the remaining driveway is designed to follow requirements of unobstructed sight angles for safe ingress and egress onto the local street. The Project only adds a net increase of eight trips to the local road compared to the previous home at the property, and the local road is not at maximum capacity. Therefore, there is substantial evidence the proposed development encourages the orderly and harmonious appearance of structures and property within the City along with associated facilities, such as, but not limited to, signs, landscaping, parking areas, and streets. C. The Project maintains the public health, safety, and general welfare, and property within the City. The Project is required to be constructed in accordance with the California Green Building Code, which is designed to assure that residential structures are safe and maintain public health and the general welfare. Moreover, the Project has been designed to follow the City's sign ordinance and landscaping ordinance. MDRA conditions were adopted to avoid potential nuisance impacts on surrounding properties. MDRA Condition C requires the site to comply with City noise ordinances. MDRA Conditions E. 12 and G.7 requires the applicant to install and maintain erosion control devices and drainage systems to assure silt and surface water does not adversely affect neighboring properties. MDRA Conditions F. 9 and 10 require compliance with muted earth tone building material finishes and approved landscape plans to avoid significant aesthetic impacts. The Project provides ample on -site parking above the minimum parking levels recommended for similar health care facilities in order to avoid the risk of Project -related parking on the street. To maximize the harmonious appearance of the Project and its interaction with the local street, the Project is conditioned to remove one of its driveways and the remaining driveway is designed to follow requirements of unobstructed sight distance requirements for safe ingress and egress onto the local street. The Project only adds a net increase of eight trips to the local road compared to the previous home at the property and the local road is not at maximum capacity. Finally, the residence will be staffed twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, to monitor operations and control visitor access, as well as for general security. Accordingly, there is substantial evidence the Project maintains the public health, safety and general welfare, and property within the City. D. The design review process worked to assist this private development Project to be more cognizant of public concerns for the aesthetics of development. Following notice to adjacent landowners within and during the extended comment period, the City received input on ways the Project could enhance its aesthetics to reduce visual impacts to the public. In addition to the already robust landscape plan to protect the public from view impacts of the Project's parking lot, the City staff agreed to condition the Project to remove one of its driveways to further reduce the neighborhood's view of the Project's parking facilities. In addition, the design Resolution No. 22-023 Page 3 review process led to improved privacy fencing between the Project and the neighborhood's adjacent pedestrian and equestrian trail to reduce impacts to the aesthetics of this neighborhood amenity. Accordingly, there is substantial evidence the design review process worked to assist this private development project to be more cognizant of public concerns for the aesthetics of development. E. The design review process worked to reasonably ensure that this new development does not have an adverse aesthetic, health, safety or architecturally related impact on existing adjoining properties or the City in general. Following notice to adjacent landowners and the extended comment period, the City received input on ways the Project could enhance its aesthetics to reduce visual impacts to the public. In addition to the already robust landscape plan to protect the public from view impacts of the Project's parking lot, the City staff agreed to condition the Project to remove one of its driveways to further reduce the neighborhood's view of the Project's parking facilities and the remaining driveway is designed to follow requirements of unobstructed sight distances for safe ingress and egress onto the local street. In addition, the design review process led to improved privacy fencing between the Project and the neighborhood's adjacent pedestrian and equestrian trail to reduce impacts to the aesthetics of this neighborhood amenity. The Project is required to be constructed in accordance with applicable building codes, which are designed to assure that structures are safe and maintain public health and the general welfare. MDRA conditions were adopted to avoid potential nuisance impacts on surrounding properties. MDRA Condition C requires the site to comply with City noise ordinances. MDRA Conditions E. 12 and G.7 requires Sharp to install and maintain erosion control devices and drainage systems to assure silt and surface water does not adversely affect neighboring properties. MDRA Conditions F. 9 and 10 require compliance with muted earth tone building material finishes and approved landscape plans to avoid significant aesthetic impacts. The Project only adds a net increase of eight trips to the local road compared to the previous home at the property, and the local road is not at maximum capacity. Expert City engineers and applicant's third -party engineer have determined the proposed vehicular access location is in the best interest of the public health and safety. Accordingly, there is substantial evidence the design review process worked to reasonably ensure that this new development does not have an adverse aesthetic, health, safety, or architecturally related impact on existing adjoining properties or the City in general. F. The proposed development complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Code and General Plan as a residential use. The single-family structure is deemed to be a residential use consistent with local residential zoning because the use classification is established by State and federal laws that require zoning protection for residential and health facilities that service the terminally ill and disabled. The City cannot interpret its General Plan and Zoning Code to preempt applicable State and federal laws by requiring a costly rezone to a commercial or other use through a vote of the electorate prior to approving permits to develop this healthcare facility. Moreover, the Project has been designed to follow the City's sign ordinance and landscaping ordinance. MDRA Condition C requires the site to comply with City noise ordinances. MDRA Conditions E. 12 and G.7 requires Sharp to install and maintain erosion control devices and drainage systems to assure silt and surface water does not adversely affect neighboring properties. MDRA Conditions F. 9 and 10 require compliance with muted earth tone building material finishes and approved landscape plans to avoid significant aesthetic impacts Accordingly, there is substantial evidence the proposed development complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Code and General Plan as a residential use. Resolution No. 22-023 Page 4 SECTION 3: The City Council further finds that the Project must be considered a single-family use pursuant to State law. SECTION 4: The City Council further finds that the Project will serve disabled individuals, and thus finds that approval of the Project is an appropriate and justified reasonable accommodation consistent with the Federal Fair Housing Act and California Fair Employment and Housing Act. SECTION 5: The City Council's decision to deny the Appeal is final, and the approval of MDRA 21-023 by City staff on February 15, 2022, remains in full force and effect. SECTION 6: The City Council's decision to deny the Appeal is subject to judicial review under California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5. SECTION 7: The City Council hereby adds the following condition to MDRA 21-023, as agreed to by the applicant: Upon expiration of all applicable statutes of limitation, if and only if no claim has been filed against the Project and there is adequate City right-of-way available, then upon mutual agreement between the City and the Applicant on the required scope of work, the Applicant shall construct a decomposed granite horse trail within City right-of-way on the east side of Valle Verde Road opposite the Project from a point directly opposite the existing horse trail intersection with Valle Verde Road to the intersection of Valle Verde Road and Espola Road at the existing limits of the concrete paving, for dedication to the City upon completion, via the Director of Development Services' approval of an Improvement Plan incorporating the trail into the City's system of streets. Construction of the horse trail shall be completed prior to occupancy of the building. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Poway, California on the 17th day of May, 2022 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: LEONARD, FRANK, GROSCH, MULLIN, VAUS NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE DISQUALIFIED: NONE Steve Vaus, Mayor ATTEST: Carrie Gallagher, CMC, City Clerk/