HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-263 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 06-263
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2005-01000, A REQUEST TO AMEND
TABLE III-12 OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT IN ORDER TO
ALLOW MEDIAN BREAKS WITH LESS THAN 1/4 MILE SPACING
ON MAJOR DIVIDED ARTERIALS, SUBJECT TO A DETAILED
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND SUBJECT TO THE REVIEW AND
APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER; AND MAKING FINDINGS
IN SUPPORT THEREOF
A. RECITALS.
1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application for General Plan Amendment
DRC2005-01000, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment is referred to as "the
application."
2. On the 12th day of April 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and
recommended approval by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-
27.
3. On August 16, 2006, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application.
4. 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 City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
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 the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the
above-referenced public hearing on August 16, 2006, including written and oral
staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds
as follows:
a. The application applies to Table III-12 of the Circulation Element of the
General Plan, and
b. This amendment does not conflict with the transportation policies of the
General Plan and will promote the goal and objectives of the
Transportation Element by improving the existing level of service at
intersections on Major Divided Arterials where a detailed traffic analysis
demonstrates that a median break less than the 1/4 mile spacing is
warranted on a Major Divided Arterial; and
Resolution No. 06-263
Page 2 of 6
c. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the
Transportation Element by permitting median breaks on Major Divided
Arterials when a detailed traffic analysis demonstrates that a median break
less than the 1/4 mile spacing would improve traffic flow and not hinder
adequate two-way progression of traffic flows; and
d. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the
adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the
environment northe surrounding properties; conversely,the amendmentwill
provide opportunities for logical, controlled access points along Major
Divided Arterials less than 1/4 mile spacing, subject to a detailed traffic
analysis and approval by the City Engineer; and
e. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the
environment.
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. The proposed circulation amendment does not conflict with the
circulation element of the General Plan and will provide for the logical
development and orderly traffic circulation of the surrounding area; and
b. 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
c. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the
environmental assessment forthe application,the City Council finds thatthere is
no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the
environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring
Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon
the findings as follows:
a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of
the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings
contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the
imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial
evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the
environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative
Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public
notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the.
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Resolution No. 06-263
Page 3 of 6
b. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all
comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and,
based on the whole record before it,finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative
Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii)that, based
on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial
evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
The City Council finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the
independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. Based on these
findings, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
c. The City Council has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to
the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds
that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation
measures during project implementation. The City Council therefore
adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project.
d. Pursuant to the requirements of California Fish and Game Code Section
711.4 and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 753.5,
the City Council finds, based on the Initial Study, the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, and considering the record as a whole, that there is no
evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential
for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the
wildlife depends. The project site is disturbed from previous weed
abatement activities, the project site is surrounded by commercial and
residential development and the site has not been identified as potential
location for habitat that is known to support sensitive biological species.
Further, the site contains no blue line streams. Based on substantial
evidence, the City Council hereby makes a declaration rebutting the
presumption of adverse effect as set forth in California Department of
Fish and Game Regulation 753.5 (Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations Code, Section 753.5.)
e. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative
Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which
constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council's
decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the
Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500
Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone
(909) 477-2750.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4
above, this City Council approves General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01000,
an amendment to Table III-12 of the Circulation Element to allow median breaks
with less than 1/4 mile spacing on Major Divided Arterials subject to a detailed
traffic analysis and subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer as
identified in this Resolution and as shown on the attached Exhibit A, and
including the condition shown below.
Resolution No. 06-263
Page 4 of 6
Planning Department
1) The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action
brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because
of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish
such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents,
officers, or employees,for any Court costs and attorney's fees which
the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court
to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion,
participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but
such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under
this condition.
6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Please see the following page
for formal adoption,avtification and signatures
Resolution No. 06-263
Page 5 of 6
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16`h day of August 2006.
AYES: Alexander, Gutierrez, Michael, Spagnolo, Williams
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
William J lexander, ayor
ATTEST:
Debra J. da CMC, City Clerk
1, DEBRA J.ADAMS,CITY CLERK 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 16'h day of August 2006.
Executed this 17`h day of August 2006, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Debra J. A #s, CMC, City Clerk
TABLE 111-12
#of ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
Lanes Median Access Restriction Intersection S acin
LocaltRoad Curbside Parkin Additional RNV or Easement
2 lane
No median. centerline Direct residential access is Intemectionlaccess spacing Parking may be restricted at
induded
striping typically not encouraged. approximately 200 feet Intersections to meet line-of-
Collector- ^�; si hl re uirements.
2 lane
.,r . -. ..
Undivided. Centerline Direct access from private Intersection/access spacing Parkin may be prohibited to -
striping.Provide left tum residential properties should a roximalel 200 feel g y p May be considered at selected intersections
pockets at intersections be avoided. pp y provide a left tum lane at where heavy traffic requires a separate right
with collector or higher Intersections,or to meet lineof- turn lane.
level streets. sight requirements.
SeConde: ,Arterial .. .
4 lanes Striped median where Direct access from private Intersections spacing... -
feasible. V f Not permitted along segmenta Should be considered at selected
residential properties should approximately 330 feet where a striped median is Intersections where heavy traffic requires a
be avoided. mvjded.
Ma or,Arterlet Z -,_ ; ,: . . p separate right turn lane.
4lanes Painted. Used for left tum Local residential streets should VO mile forprincipal
movements. not take direct access from intersections. Left tum Not penmtled. May be considered at intersections to
major arterials.No residential restrictions to be considered at accommodate full-width right turn lanes or
driveways, minor unsignalized driveways If dual-left turn lanes.
tlesiretl s acin not feasible.
Ma orDivided,Arterlal�
6 lanes Raised. Used far dual left Left tum access allowed at
K mile as a minimum. Not ermitted.
tum movements at key signalized intersections only. Alternate median breaks may 6e p May be considered at intersections to
Intersections. No residential driveways, considered subject to a detailed accommodate full-width right tum lanes or
traffic analysis and subject to dual left tum lanes.
the review and approval of the
Mg or�DlvitletlVNl ttwa . .c=_
CW En sneer.
Blanes R ersec0ons nts atkey eft No residentia driveways my /.mile as a minfmum. Not permitted l
May be considered at intersections to
accommodate full-width right tum lanes or
dual left tum lanes.
General Plan Amendment
DRC2005-01000
Exhibit A
X
m
N
O
Resolution c
0
Z
pl O
m .
m o
0) 9)
O N
Q) W