The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About91-204 - Resolutions RESOLUi~ON NO. 91-204 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OOUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO Ctk?AMONGA, CALIFORNIA, D~YING G~qERAL PLAN ~ 91-02B, SUBAREA 3, TO AM~qD THE G~ERAL PLAN IAND USE MAP FRC~ M~D1T~ RESID~/AL (8-14 DW~TNG UNITS PER AC~E) TO LOW M~DIL~ RESIDenTIAL (4-8 E~L~NG UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPRO~Y 27.89 ACRES OF LAND BORD~D ON THE NORI~{- WEST BY THE ONTARIO (I-15) FRE~Y, ON ~ EAST BY DESIGNATED LAND, AND ON THE SOUTH BY EXISTING OC~9~CIAL FINDINGS IN SUPPOR~ THERMOF - APN: 227-211-02, 04, 05, 09, 10, 15, 20, AND 29 A. Recitals. (i) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for General Plan Amendment No. 91-02B as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." (ii) On August 28, 1991, the Planning C~mission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearings on the application and rec~m~n~ded denial by the adoption of Resolution No. 91-126. (iii) On November 20, 1991, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. (iv) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find, determine, and resolve as follc~s: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing on November 20, 1991, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) Subarea 3 of the application applies to approximately 27.89 acres of land, basically a triangular configuration, bordered on the northwest by the Ontario (I-15) Freeway, on the east by Etiwar~m Avenue and existing Low Medium Residential designated land, and on the south by c~_rcial designated land bordering Foothill Boulevard as shown on Exhibit "A," and is presently underdeveloped with a single family residence in the northeastern portion. Said properties are currently designated as Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre); and Resolution No. 91-204 Page 2 (b) The property to the northwest of the subject site is designated freeway and is the Ontario (I-15) Freeway. The properties to the east are designated Low Medium Residential and underdeveloped with single family residences and on the opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue it is designated Medium Residential. ~%e properties to the south are designated Ccmm~cial and are partially developed with mixed business activities; and (c) ~ amendment may conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and my not provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and (d) ~fuis amendment my not prc~ote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and (e) This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor on the surr0u~ir~ properties, but land use incompati- bilities may result. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) That the properties located in Subarea 3 of the application are not suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district and are incompatible with existing and adjacent land use designations as evidenced by the site's being bordered on the northwest by the 1-15 freeway; and (b) That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor on the surrounding properties as evidenced by the findings and conclusions listed in Parts I and II of the Initial Environ- mental Study, but that land use ~tibilities may result; and (c) That the proposed amendment may not be in conformance with the General Plan due to the potential of estm_blishing incompatible land use relationships with single family uses and significant vehicular traffic of the adjacent freeway. 4. This Council hereby finds that the project has been reviewed and considcered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. However, this Council does not authorize the issuance of a Negative Declaration because the land use change may not prcm~te the goals and objec- tives of the General Plan. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby resolves that on the 20th day of November, 1991, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga denies General Plan Amendment No. 91-02B, Subarea 3. Resolution No. 91-204 Page 3 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSfD, APPROVfD, and ADOPTfD this 20th day of November, 1991. AYES: Alexander, Buquet, Stout, Williams, Wright NOES: None D~nnis L Stout,~or I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY f~.~RK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 20th day of Nov~_r, 1991. Executed this 21st day of Novel, 1991 at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Ad~, City Clerk Resolution No. 91-204 Page 4 IEtiwindm Afel Gene~ll Ptln Amendment~ 91-02 LM LM - Lind UII Delignltion / , . / [] PROP[RTIE$ CURR£NTL¥ Off. (~-I DIELLING UNIT~ ~ER ~C~[} 'LM ~ ~ 1 - Subm~ea Nos. ~ ~