Title
HEARING - To consider a request submitted by the Cameron Park Community Service District appealing the Planning Commission’s February 9, 2017, denial of Special Use Permit Revision S87-0057-R/Cameron Park CSD Rasmussen Park on property identified by Assessor’s Parcel Number 083-466-10, consisting of 10 acres, in the Cameron Park area; and staff recommending the Board take the following actions:
1) Find that the project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines; and
2) Deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Planning Commission's February 9, 2017, denial of Special Use Permit Revision S87-0057-R. (Supervisorial District 4) (Est. Time: 2 Hr.)
Body
BACKGROUND
This is to consider a request submitted by the Cameron Park Community Service District (Cameron Park CSD) appealing the Planning Commission’s February 9, 2017, denial of Special Use Permit Revision S87-0057-R/Cameron Park CSD Rasmussen Park to allow the operation of an existing unauthorized T-ball field, installation of a bocce ball court, and the construction of an eight-foot solid wood fence (the "Project"), on property identified by Assessor’s Parcel Number 083-466-10, consisting of 10 acres located on the east side of Mira Loma Drive at the terminus of Monukka Drive, in the Cameron Park area, Supervisorial District 4. (County Planner: Mel Pabalinas) (Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] Guidelines)
Special Use Permit S87-0057-R was considered by the Planning Commission on February 9, 2017. The Commission denied the Project (4-0 Vote). No Findings for denial accompanied the action. On February 22, 2017, the applicant, Cameron Park CSD, filed an appeal of the denial of the Special Use Permit during the 10-day appeal period (Attachment 2A).
The Cameron Park CSD’s appeal details the District’s efforts to provide additional recreational activities, T-ball and bocce ball, and correct the issues associated with the operation of these activities including vehicular parking and related impacts to the adjacent residential neighborhood. No new information was provided with the appeal that has not been previously considered in the Project analysis or discussed during the Planning Commission hearing.
ALTERNATIVE
The Board may elect to approve the appeal and reverse the action by the Planning Commission resulting in the approval of Special Use Permit Revision S87-0057-R based on the original recommendation in the Staff Report (Attachment A) and take the following actions:
1) Find that the Project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines; and
2) Approve the appeal, thereby reversing the denial of Special Use Permit Revision S87-0057-R by the Planning Commission on February 9, 2017, based on the Findings (Attachment B) and subject to the Conditions of Approval (Attachment C).
CONTACT
Mel Pabalinas, Acting Principal Planner
Roger Trout, Division Director
Development Services Division
Community Development Agency