Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-77 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 99-77 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-13, A MASTER PLAN FOR A RETAIL SHOPPING CENTER CONSISTING OF DESIGN REVIEW FOR 116,394 SQUARE FEET OF LEASABLE SPACE ON 11.75 ACRES OF LAND UNDER THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN (SUBAREA 7), LOCATED BETWEEN SPRUCE AND ELM AVENUES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 208-352-63 THROUGH 69. A. Recitals. 1. Foothill Properties, LLC has filed an application for the extension of the approval of Conditional Use Permit 97-13, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject time extension request is referred to as "the application." 2. On August 27, 1997, this Commission adopted its Resolution No. 97-50, thereby approving, subject to specific conditions and time limits, Conditional Use Permit 97-13. 3. On July 28, 1999, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 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 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced meeting on July 28, 1999, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The previously approved Conditional Use Permit is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes and policies; and b. The extension of the Conditional Use Permit approval will not cause significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes and policies; and c. The extension of the design review approval is not likely to cause public health and safety problems; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-77 TE FOR CUP 97-13 July 28, 1999 Page 2 d. The extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. e. The project was granted an initial approval period of two years. Subsequently, the City Council adopted its Ordinance No.596,which established an approval period of five years with no further time extensions allowed; hence,the project may be extended for up to three years. 3. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further,this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c)of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5c of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further,based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Proiect Applicant Expiration Conditional Use Permit 97-13 Foothill Properties, LLC August 27, 2002 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-77 TE FOR CUP 97-13 July 28, 1999 Page 3 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby modifies the conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. 97-50 and the Standard Conditions, and incorporated herein by this reference, to add the following: Planning Division 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 the applicant of his obligations under this condition. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF JULY 1999. PLANNING COMM SION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: L-rry T. /,del, Chairman ATTES . Lawrence J. HenderAICP, Acting Secretary I, Lawrence J. Henderson, AICP, Acting 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 28th day of July 1999, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: MANNERINO