Peace, for Now, on Dove Canyon Courtyard Issue

“It’s time to make peace.” That’s what Marcus Kerner said when he asked for the Rancho Santa Margarita Planning Commission to put "to rest tonight" an issue that has been simmering in the community for years. 

Kerner—on behalf of about 20 attendees—spoke in favor of the Dove Canyon Courtyard application that was in front of the planning commissioners at their meeting Wednesday—and they listened.

The most contentious, longstanding issue to come before the RSM Planning Commission in its 10 years of existence was brought to a close at the 4½-hour meeting when the commissioners voted 4-1 to approve a permit—with 48 conditions—agreed to by Kenny Hrabik, the owner of Dove Canyon Courtyard.

DCC spent close to five years working with the city to resolve issues relating to the use of the property as a wedding and special-events venue. The main point of contention: Noise.

The last time the Planning Commission addressed this item was April 21, 2010, at which time it was continued for an indefinite period of time to allow DCC to work with the city staff, a second round of sound specialists and interested homeowners to define noise measurement standards and measure noise at the most affected homeowners’ property lines.

According to the staff report, the sound studies concluded that DCC is in compliance with the city’s noise ordinance.

Dove Canyon Courtyard took over a location that was previously a plant nursery in the Dove Canyon Center and turned it into an outdoor-event facility. Two private gated communities of homes are on different sides of center, leading to the noise complaints.

Scores of residents from Dove Canyon and Rancho Cielo were on hand to weigh in on both sides of the issue, as were RSM business owners and employees there to support DCC—before the Rancho Planning Commission made its decision.

Anticipating a large crowd based on their experience at the April 2010 meeting, Planning Commission Chairman Jack Leonard and city staffers employed a unique strategy for the public hearing. Speakers indicated whether they 1) wanted to be recognized on public record by name and their support or opposition to the item, 2) wanted to speak or 3) wanted to defer speaking to another individual for them, giving that representative additional speaking time. 

More than 60 speaker request forms were split almost equally among the three categories. Although there was a large crowd, it was clear that there were only a few distinct points of view.

Homeowners from Dove Canyon and Rancho Cielo opposing the application were concerned with the noise in general and specifically condition No. 21 of the permit that would allow DCC to increase the maximum number of events at the facility from 35 per year to 156 per year, and the maximum attendance at those events from 180 to 300.

There were also homeowners who thought DCC's noise reduction efforts were working and that DCC was a good neighbor and should be allowed to move forward.

Several other RSM business owners spoke in favor of the applicant, worried that benefits that DCC brings to the community—such as employment, revenue to the city and business to other local companies—would be lost.

Chairman Leonard—the only remaining member from the previous Planning Commission—was also the only commissioner who had heard the matter before. With , there was a lot of education going on before and during the meeting.

In his remarks, Commissioner Brad McGirr addressed this point and assured the crowd that he had received and read all previous staff reports, all applicable regulations, all public correspondence and had listened to the entire six hours of audio from the April 2010 Planning Commission meeting in preparation for the meeting.

McGirr utilized his own experience of living next to a noisy road, where he was bothered so much that he put in double-paned windows to reduce the noise, asking if once the noise issue “gets under your skin, can you get rid of it?”

He acknowledged clear concerns but noted that since DCC was issued a permit for an enclosed area for dancing in June 2009, “there has been a significant reduction in sound.”

McGirr concluded from the data that DCC not only complied with the city's outdoor sound restrictions, but also would be within the limits of indoor restrictions.

Commissioner Peter Whittingham focused on several conditions of the permit that addressed communication requirements between the applicant and the city, and enforcement provisions in determining that the city had adequately provided methods and procedures to ensure compliance. Whittingham also noted that Hrabik had done everything that he could reasonably do to be a good neighbor, including offering his facility for use to the community for a number of nonprofit events.

Commissioner Jim Eakin—an electrical engineer—said that regardless of what the measurements are, “we lock onto certain sounds,” adding that he felt that “we can’t dictate to others what is tolerable.” His engineering background made him question whether the sound studies were adequate,  being that they only measured the decibel levels at homeowners’ property lines and did not calibrate by putting a meter on the other end at the location where the music was being played—leading him to vote against permit approval.

Having the last word, original Planning Commission member Leonard looked back to his typical focus: “What does the general plan do with regard to this use?”

Leonard, who felt DCC was in compliance with the general plan, went further by looking to the urban planner’s vision for the community. According to Leonard, urban planner Richard Reese—that visionary—“placed a high value on balance and saw gathering places as an essential component of the community.” It was Leonard’s opinion that Dove Canyon Courtyard was an excellent example of a gathering place.

Concluding that DCC was a beneficial use according to the original concept of the community, Leonard moved the item, with one amendment to condition No. 21—adding a definition of tent to the condition, to distinguish it from a canopy, because the condition requires a number of the events to be “tented” events.

The permit was approved with Eakin’s dissent.

The remaining agenda item was continued to an adjourned regular meeting of the RSM Planning Commission to be held on Feb. 17, 6:30 p.m.