HomeMy WebLinkAbout00-93 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 00-93
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01, A REQUEST TO
ADD MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIALAS A PERMITTED USE IN THE MIXED
USE PLANNING AREA IX, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 6TH
STREET AND MILLIKEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF -APN: 290-272-17 .
A. Recitals.
1. JPI Westcoast Development, L.P., has filed an application for Subarea 18 Specific Plan
Amendment as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Amendment is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 13th day of September 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission 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 the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing on September 13, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together
with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property within the City; and
b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment;
and
C. The proposed amendment is consistent with the flexible land use concept of the
Subarea 18 Specific Plan.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-
referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. The amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the Subarea 18
Specific Plan orthe General Plan and will provide for the logical development of the Planning Area IX
and the General Plan and with related development; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-93
SUBAREA 18 AMENDMENT 00-01 —JPI
September 13, 2000
Page 2
b. The amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Industrial Area Specific
Plan; and
C. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and
d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives of the Subarea 18 Specific
Plan, and the purposes of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan; and
e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan.
4. An Environmental Impact Report(EIR)was prepared and certified as a Master EIR forthe
Empire Lakes Subarea 18 Industrial Area Specific Plan. The California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Section 21157.1 provides that the preparation and certification of a Master EIR allows forthe
limited review of subsequent projects that were described in the Master EIR as being within the
scope of the reporting accordance with certain requirements. However, because of the changes
that are submitted by this project, an Addendum was prepared for said project. An Addendum to the
Subarea 18 Specific Plan final EIR is appropriate documentation because some changes or
additions are necessary to describe the proposed residential project but none of the conditions
described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR
have occurred. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the attached Addendum
based on the following findings:
a. There have not been substantial changes in the project that require major revisions
to the previous EIR because of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in
severity of previously identified significant effects.
b. There have not been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under
which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the
involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects.
C. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and
could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was
certified as complete, that shows any of the following: 1)the project will have one or more significant
effects not discussed in the previous EIR, 2) significant effects previously examined will be
substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR, 3) mitigation measures or alternatives
previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or
more significant effects of the project but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation
measure or alternative, or 4) mitigation measures or alternatives, which are considerably different
from those analyzed in the final EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the
environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,this
Commission hereby approves the application, and recommends approval of Subarea 18 Specific
Plan Amendment No. 00-01, as shown in the staff report.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-93
SUBAREA 18 AMENDMENT 00-01 —JPI
September 13, 2000
Page 3
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2000.
PLANNING CO MISSION Lairman;
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
arty cNiel,
ATTEST:
Brad Bye ecreta
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 13th day of September 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS, MCNIEL, STEWART
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MANNERINO, TOLSTOY