Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-209 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 04-209 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00749, TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL (.1-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR 63.5 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED AT THE NORTHERLY END OF WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD AT THE INTERSECTION OF COLONBERO ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0225-084-04,0226-081-09 AND 10,AND 0226- 082-29. A. RECITALS. 1. Henderson Creek Properties, LLC (the"Applicant")seeks approval of a series of actions related to the annexation of land from unincorporated San Bernardino County into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the approval of a General Plan Amendment, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, and associated Development Agreement. The actions also include the development of 123 single-family housing units on approximately 65.3 acres and designations of flood control, utility corridor, and open space on approximately 25.1 acres of land. Another 10 acres is also proposed for annexation and is currently used for a utility easement and for flood control purposes. The total area to be annexed is approximately 100.4 acres. The density of the development is approximately 1.9 dwelling units per gross acre. These series of actions and approvals are hereinafter defined in this Resolution as the "Project." 2. The Applicant has submitted the following applications relating to the Project: Annexation DRC2003-00753, General Plan Land Use Amendment DRC2003- 00749, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00750, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, and Development Agreement DRC2003-00751 (collectively the "Project Applications"). These Project Applications, as well as the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBT716324, constitute the matters involving the Project,which are submitted to the City Council for decision and action. 3. The Applicant's request for General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00749 is as described in the title of this Resolution and depicted on Exhibit A to this Resolution. 4. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Flood Control/Utility Corridor and Hillside Residential and is comprised of vacant land,utility corridors, and scattered single-family residences. The property to the west is designated Conservation and Flood Control/Utility Corridor and includes Etiwanda Creek Flood Control basins and conservation area. The property to the east is Resolution No. 04-209 Page 2 of 15 designated Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) and includes single-family residential (Sheridan Estates Tract 13564). The property to the south is designated Flood Control/Utility Corridor, Conservation, and Very Low Residential and is comprised of vacant land, utility corridors, and one single- family dwelling, and is the site of the City's proposed 300 acre(Etiwanda Creek) annexation,which includes a proposed General Plan Amendment from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre)to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre)for approximately 80 acres of land. 5. On May 12, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Project,and after receipt of public testimony, closed the hearing on that date. On May 12, 2004, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 04-58, recommending approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00749 along with other associated applications. 6. On June 2, 2004,the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") and the Project, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence regarding the Final EIR and the Project. After the receipt of public testimony, the City Council continued the public hearing on the Final EIR and the Project to its regularly scheduled meeting of June 16, 2004. 7. On June 16, 2004,the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a continued public hearing on the Final EIR and the Project, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence regarding the Final EIR and the Project,and after the receipt of public testimony, closed the hearing. 8. 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 facts and information contained in the record of this Project,the City Council makes the following findings and statements, and takes the following actions, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA") (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq.): a. The City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, prepared the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Project, including certain technical appendices (the "Appendices") to the Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2003111057). The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day Resolution No. 04-209 Page 3 of 15 public review and comment period from February 20, 2004, through April 5, 2004. Comments were received during that period and written responses were prepared and sent to all persons and entities submitting comments. Those comments and the responses thereto have been included in the Final EIR, as well as the revisions to the Draft EIR and a copy of the Draft Development Agreement(Appendix K). Those documents,together with the Draft EIR and Appendices, comprise the Final EIR. b. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was completed pursuant to CEQA, and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et. seq. ("the Guidelines'). By Resolution No. 04-207, the City Council has certified the Final EIR as being in compliance with the requirements of CEQA. c. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was presented to the City Council and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR and has reached its own conclusions with respect to the Project and as to whether and how to approve the various components of the Project approvals. d. The City Council finds that the Final EIR represents the independent judgment of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and adequately addresses the impacts of the Project and imposes appropriate mitigation measures for the Project. e. Public Resources Code Section 21081 provides that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: L Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the completed environmental impact report. ii. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and such changes have been adopted by such agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. iii. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. f. The City Council finds, based upon the Initial Study, the Final EIR, public comments, public agency comments,and the entire record before it,that the Project may create significant impacts in the areas of Land Use and Planning, Traffic and Circulation, Noise, Geology and Soils, Hydrology and Water Quality, Public Health and Safety, Biological Resources, Air Quality, Resolution No. 04-209 Page 4 of 15 and Public Services. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Project, which will mitigate and in some cases, avoid the significant impacts. The specific changes and alterations required, and a brief explanation of the rationale for the findings with regard to each impact, are contained in the "CEQA Findings"for the Project (Exhibit "F"to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report)and are incorporated herein by reference. In addition to the rationale and explanation contained in the "CEQA Findings", the City Council makes the following additional findings regarding the impacts of the Project on the resources and services listed in this paragraph: L Land Use and Planning. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan requires a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, and the Final EIR indicates that the Project would be inconsistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, because some of the proposed residential lots would be less than 20,000 square feet. With the approval of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment that will change the land use district from Very Low Residential (0.1 — 2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2 —4 dwelling units per acre)for the 65.3 acre area designated for residential development, the Project would then be consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. As a result, the Project site may be developed with lots less than 20,000 square feet. In addition, in order to address the reduction in lot sizes and the likely effect of lots averaging 18,000 square feet, with a minimum size of 14,025 square feet, on the ability of those property owners to own and maintain horses on those lots, a mitigation measure is being imposed (Mitigation Measure LU-2) to require the developer to pay an in-lieu fee to the City for the development of an equestrian center that would serve residents in the area desiring to own and maintain horses. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan also requires a particular design and development theme that is consistent with the character of Old Etiwanda by having access to trails, provisions for views of the mountains and complying with certain design requirements for landscaping, walls, fencing, lighting and the community's entry points. Mitigation Measure LU-1 is being imposed that requires the project developer to submit a landscape plan that is consistent with the City's neighborhood Theme Plan as contained in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that any inconsistency of the Project with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. ii. Traffic and Circulation. The Final EIR indicates that the proposed Project will increase vehicle trips and impact the level of service along arterial streets and intersections. Specifically, the Final EIR found that Project traffic, together with other anticipated traffic, will likely cause traffic flow to be deficient by experiencing a Level of Service(LOS)of"E" or "F" at the intersections of Wardman-Bullock Road (NS) at Wilson Avenue (EW) and at Etiwanda Avenue (NS) at Banyan Street (EW). Mitigation Measures are imposed to require the developer to construct Resolution No. 04-209 Page 5 of 15 and widen Wardman-Bullock Road along the Project frontage(Mitigation Measure TC-3), to install a traffic signal at Etiwanda Avenue (NS) and Banyan Street intersection (Mitigation Measure TC-5), to contribute developer fees for other traffic improvements(Mitigation Measures TC-1 and TC-5), and to modify signing and striping of certain roadways and intersections (Mitigation Measures TC-2 and TC-4). The City's "City- Wide System Fees for Transportation Development" provides for the payment of fees at the time building permits are issued based on a formula adopted by the City Council by resolution. That formula provides for the payment of a fee per dwelling unit of approximately$1,710.03 and a credit against those fees for certain qualifying traffic improvements that mitigate the traffic impacts of the Project. The City is required to use traffic impact fees to fund City-wide and regional roadway and traffic improvements,and as a consequence,the payment of those fees by the project developer will contribute to the mitigation of the Project's impacts to traffic and circulation. Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that traffic at the study intersections will be reduced so that those intersections operate at a LOS "D," and that the impacts of the Project on traffic and circulation will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. Noise. The Final EIR identifies the likelihood of short-term impacts on ambient noise levels during construction of the Project. The primary source of construction noise is heavy equipment associated with construction activities, such as trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers, cranes and portable generators with high levels of sound generation. Earthmoving equipment is anticipated to create noise ranging between 75 to 90 dB(A)at 50 feet from the source. A mitigation measure has been imposed that will require the construction contractors to adhere to the City's Development Code for hours of construction activity — 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no construction to take place on Sundays or holidays(Mitigation Measure N- 1). Based on this mitigation measure, the City Council finds that the shore term noise impacts from the Project will be reduced to less than significant levels. The Final EIR also identified that noise levels at the facades of homes nearest the Project exit at Wardman-Bullock Road would experience noise near 60 dB CNEL due to vehicular traffic. The Final EIR states that if the property owners of the homes fronting on Wardman-Bullock Road can close their windows and still obtain adequate ventilation, then the goal of reducing the interior noise to a 45 dB(A) CNEL interior noise level would be achieved. A mitigation measure will be imposed to require the developer to install air conditioning units for the residences that front along Wardman-Bullock Road so as to allow window closure during warm days so as to achieve a less than significant interior noise level for those homes with the windows closed (Mitigation Measure N-2). Based on this mitigation measure,the City Council finds that the potential noise impacts of the Project on current and future residents will be mitigated to a less than significant level. Resolution No. 04-209 Page 6 of 15 iv. Geology and Soils. The Final EIR identifies that development of the Project will expose people and structures to risks associated with seismic ground shaking due to regional and local faults located in the area. Mitigation measures are imposed which require the developer to ensure that all grading plans and grading work are done in compliance with the geotechnical report for the Project so that soil and slopes are properly compacted and grading work achieves all seismic requirements (Mitigation Measure GS-1),that the developer shall submit building plans which incorporate the recommendations of the geotechnical report for preliminary foundation work, utility trenching, and concrete slabs (Mitigation Measure GS-2),and that all buildings and structures are built to Uniform Building Code and/or Structural Engineers Association of California standards for seismic safety (Mitigation Measure GS-3). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the effects of seismic shaking on persons and structures will be mitigated to a level that is less than significant. v. Hydrology and Water Quality. The Final EIR identifies that during storm events, construction activities (particularly vegetation removal, grading and excavation), could affect the amounts of sediments and suspended solid material leaving the site such that water quality downstream of the site could be affected to a level that was potentially significant. Vegetation removal and grading would expose the soil to erosion by wind and rain, and rainfall could carry more sediment off the disturbed areas and adversely affect water quality downstream. In addition,during earthwork and construction activities, pollutants that may be discharged in stormwater include vehicle fluids such as oil, grease and coolants, asphaltic emulsions associated with asphalt-concrete paving, paints and solvents,wood products,and metal and metal plated products. In accordance with the State of California's implementation of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements imposed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the Project developer will be required to include Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction of the Project from polluting surface waters. Compliance with these permitting requirements will require the Project developer and construction crews to comply with a variety of measures,such as limiting clearing and grubbing areas to the limits of the active construction area, using hay bales and sand bags to control erosion during the rainy season, using enclosed storage sheds where possible, utilizing hazardous materials in a manner that avoids contact with the ground, avoiding the application of certain materials during periods of rainfall,washing of equipment orvehicles in a designated place where a sump can be located to collect wash water for proper disposal, and servicing equipment and vehicles off-site. A mitigation measure is imposed to require compliance with these permitting requirements and BMPs (Mitigation Measure HWQ-1). The City Council finds that with the imposition of this mitigation measure and after implementation of BMPs set forth in the SWPPP, potentially significant impacts on water quality from construction activity will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. Resolution No. 04-209 Page 7 of 15 vi. Public Health and Safety. The Final EIR identifies that the frequency of high winds will expose structures and residents to potential damage from extreme wind conditions. In addition, wildfires on adjacent lands, including National Forest land and undeveloped properties, could threaten residential development on the Project site. Specifically, the Final EIR indicates that Santa Ana winds along the front of the mountains can reach hurricane force,with winds in the area of the Project detected at reaching 80 to 100 miles per hour. Damage to roofs,fences,windows and landscaping is possible in these types of conditions. Three mitigation measures are imposed to mitigate the impacts of wind hazard to a less than significant level. Those measures include requirements to utilize optimum building materials and construction techniques as required by the Uniform Building Code, to require disclosure of the potential for high winds in sales documents to prospective homebuyers, and to comply with other mitigation measures for control of particulate matter emissions during grading and construction (Mitigation Measures HS-1, HS-2, HS-3). Compliance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code has been demonstrated to result in structures that are capable of withstanding winds projected for the Project area without serious damage. With respect to the impacts created by wildfires on adjacent lands, the City Council is particularly familiar with these risks after the City and surrounding areas recently experienced the Grand Prix fire in October 2003. The City Council also understands that the addition of persons into an area of wildland vegetation increases the number of ignitions (risk), the growth of brush after a fire increases the intensity of new fires in the area (hazard), and the addition of homes and amenities into the same area (value) creates an increased need for fire protection and fuel modification. Design features have already been incorporated into the Project to ensure vegetation areas to the north are separated from residential structures with a trail, a wall and a riprap drainage channel so as to provide approximately 100 feet of distance between chaparral vegetation and the homes. All homes will also be constructed with Class A roofs. Along the western boundary of the site where the wildfire threat is moderate, a six-foot masonry wall and "firewise" landscaping between native vegetation and the homes are to be required. A comprehensive mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure HS- 4) requires a detailed landscape plan/fuel modification plan to contain requirements for "firewise" vegetation in specific areas, irrigation plans and specific standards applicable to certain areas of the Project site. In addition, Mitigation Measure HS-5 requires the installation of residential fire sprinklers as a component of the construction. The City Council finds that with the combination of appropriate landscaping, residential fire sprinklers, the introduction of certain new paved surfaces where none currently exist, and implementation of the Fuel Modification Plan will effectively reduce movement of potential fire into the Project area and thereby mitigate impacts to a level of less than significant. Resolution No. 04-209 Page 8 of 15 vii. Biological Resources. The proposed Project would result in development of a 65.3 acre area of the site, and the Final EIR indicates that, prior to the Grand Prix fire of October 2003,that area was previously covered with upland sage scrub, disturbed annual grassland and a small area of flat-top buckwheat scrub. Specifically, priorto the Grand Prix fire, the portion of the site proposed for development had approximately 1.5 acres of disturbed annual grassland, 4.2 acres of disturbed annual grassland dominated by deerweed, 53.5 acres of Upland sage scrub dominated by white sage, and 4.5 acres of flat-top buckwheat scrub. The impacts on the annual grassland areas is not considered significant because of the relatively small area impacted (approximately 1/3 of the total disturbed annual grassland on the site) and because those areas had experienced substantial disturbance from prior weed control measures, and the construction of power line maintenance roads and other roads that cross the property. With respect to upland sage scrub, most of that area was dominated by white sage,which is not considered to be sensitive habitat by the resource agencies that regulate biological resources. However, the City Council recognizes that the loss of this plant community for wildlife habitat is important when considering cumulative impacts on this resource. With respect to the flat-top buckwheat scrub, this is a common species and an indicator of prior disturbance to the land. The Final EIR indicates that no sensitive species of flat-top buckwheat scrub were found on the site and therefore no impacts were expected to occur. The Final EIR recognizes that much of the vegetation previously found on the site would likely grow back after the fire if no development took place. However, the Biological Assessment not only found no substantial evidence of sensitive plant or wildlife species on the site, but it also found that due to the area already being disturbed by dirt roads for power line maintenance, previous construction activity, commercial harvesting of white sage, and flood control improvements and activities, development of the site would not have a significant impact on biological resources. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Project site is within the boundaries of the North Etiwanda Open Space and Habitat Preservation Program(NEOSHPP),as adopted by the County of San Bernardino. To implement the goals and purposes of that Program, a mitigation measure has been imposed to require the Project developer to acquire and convey to the County, 58 acres of land within or near the NEOSHPP area that support alluvial fan sage scrub and/or upland sage scrub(Mitigation Measure BIO-1). This 58 acre area is intended to accomplish a`one to one"mitigation in acreage for the loss of the 53.5 acres of Upland sage scrub and to mitigate the potential loss of habitat for sensitive plants and animal species, and the loss of raptor foraging land. As required by the mitigation measure, the off-site mitigation land shall be equal to or greater in habitat value than that of the Project site. The City Council finds that the conveyance into the NEOSHPP of 58 acres of land by the Project developer would mitigate this impact to a level that is less than significant. Resolution No. 04-209 Page 9 of 15 viii. Air Quality. The Final EIR identifies that the Project may create significant and unavoidable impacts to Air Quality. Specifically,the Final EIR identifies that emissions from construction related activities are likely to exceed the threshold of significance specified by the South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD). These impacts are considered to be short-term (less than one year) and temporary and can cause nuisance impacts to adjacent land uses in the local area by way of fugitive dust. One cause of these short-term impacts is blowing dust resulting from the grading of the site. In addition, the use of diesel engine equipment during grading and construction along with worker trips is anticipated to create levels of nitrous oxides (NOx) that are also above the SCAQMD's thresholds of significance. Similarly,construction- related emissions, particularly from architectural coatings (painting)and off-road diesel equipment, are anticipated to create significant levels of reactive organic gases (ROG)and nitrous oxides (NOx)that will exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance and result in significant short-term air pollution impacts. A comprehensive mitigation measure is imposed on the Project(Mitigation Measure AQ-1)which will require various dust control measures, emission control measures and off-site actions. Included in those measures are requirements to limit the simultaneous disturbance area to as small an area as is possible, terminate soil disturbance and accelerate dust control measures when winds exceed 25 miles per hour, stabilize disturbed areas if construction is delayed, require 90-day low-NOx tune-ups for off-road equipment, limit idling to 10 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment, encourage carpooling for construction workers, limit lane closures to off-peak travel periods, park construction vehicles off traveled roadways, wet down or cover dirt hauled off-site,wash or sweep access points daily and encourage receipt of construction materials during non-peak traffic hours. The City Council finds that with implementation of the recommended measures, construction emissions will be reduced, and that the Project's contribution to regional emission of criteria pollutants will be minimized. However, the City Council finds that despite the imposition of all these comprehensive mitigation requirements,construction emissions(building phase) will exceed SCAQMD's thresholds for ROG and NOx, and therefore, would remain significant after mitigation. ix. Cumulative Impacts — Air Quality Noise and Public Services. The Final EIR provides that this Project, together with the construction of development projects in the vicinity,would likely create cumulative short- term impacts to air quality during construction. This Project would also create a significant cumulative impact to regional air quality because the Project would add incremental pollutants to the South Coast Air Basin in the form of additional vehicle emissions. With respect to noise,the Final EIR indicates that the Project will create short-term cumulative construction noise impacts and long-term cumulative noise impacts due to increased vehicle trips. With respect to public services(schools),state Resolution No. 04-209 Page 10 of 15 law (Government Code Section 65995 (h)) provides for the payment of developer fees and deems such payment to be full and complete mitigation of school impacts. Consequently,as a matter of law,the long- term cumulative impacts to schools from this and other projects are deemed to be fully mitigated by the payment of developer fees and the City is precluded, by law,from imposing additional mitigation to address these potential impacts. The City Council finds that noise and air quality impacts associated with increased vehicle trips would remain significant when combined with existing and anticipated construction projects in the vicinity of the Project. g. The City Council finds, based on the Final EIR, that after implementation of the proposed mitigation measures,the following impacts associated with the proposed Project would remain significant:air quality(short-term impacts and short and long-term cumulative impacts)and noise(short-term and long-term cumulative impacts). h. The Final EIR describes a range of alternatives to the Project that might fulfill basic objectives of the Project. These alternatives include the required "No Project-No Development' alternative, and the "Development Under the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative." Other alternatives that were considered and rejected included the alternative location alternative and the alternative land use alternative. As set forth below,the alternatives identified in the Final EIR are not feasible because they would not achieve the basic objectives of the Project or would do so only to a much smaller degree and, therefore, leave unaddressed the significant economic, infrastructure, and General Plan goals that the Project is intended to accomplish, and are thus infeasible due to social and economic considerations, and/or they are infeasible because they would not eliminate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed Project. Accordingly, each of the alternatives is infeasible. In making this finding, the City Council determines as follows: i) The objectives of the Project are: a) To be consistent with, and implement, the established policies and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code, and all other City development guidelines; b) To annex the 90.4 acre Project site and adjacent 10 acre utility easement into the City of Rancho Cucamonga; c) To Integrate the Project with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods and establish a development that results in logical, coordinated growth; d) To establish a Project-wide circulation system that meets regional and local transportation needs and accommodates both vehicles and pedestrians; Resolution No. 04-209 Page 11 of 15 e) To provide a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas, and landscaping to support the residents of the Project and surrounding area in an efficient and timely manner; f) To provide backbone public infrastructure (i.e., roads, utilities) to serve Project residents and the surrounding community; g) To minimize impacts to,and generate revenues in excess of costs for various public service agencies; and h) To provide quality housing opportunities compatible with existing and planned development that responds to market demands. ii) The"No Project-No Development"Alternative assumes that no new land uses would be constructed on the Project site and that the site would remain vacant and undeveloped. Although this alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed Project, it would not meet the Project objectives. Specifically, it would not meet the Project's objective to provide quality housing that would be compatible with existing and planned development for the area, would not provide a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas,and would not provide landscaping for Project residents and surrounding area residents. Furthermore, as the subject property is under private ownership, the elimination of future development within an area previously approved for residential development would not be legally or financially feasible. Therefore this alternative is rejected. iii) The"Development Under the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative' assumes that the Project site would be developed under the current City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designation(Very Low Residential). Under this designation,and assuming that the area disturbed by grading is equal to that of the proposed Project, the minimum lot sizes would be 20,000 square feet and the number of lots that could be developed would be approximately 90 rather than the 123 as currently proposed. This reduction in development by approximately 33 dwelling units would result in lower traffic, air quality, and noise impacts than the proposed Project, but would not reduce to less than significance the short-term impacts on air quality from construction-related emissions, cumulative long-term impacts on air quality from Project emissions and cumulative short and long-term noise impacts. In addition,this alternative would not meet the Project objectives to provide quality housing that would be compatible with existing and planned development for the area,would not provide a system of public/community facilities, including trails,open space areas, and would not provide landscaping for Project residents and surrounding area residents. Resolution No. 04-209 Page 12 of 15 L Mitigation measures described in the Mitigation Monitoring Program will avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant environmental effects of the Project. Further, the environmental, physical, social, economic and other benefits of the Project, as set forth in this section and in the "CEQA Findings"for the Project (Exhibit"F"to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report), which is incorporated herein by this reference, outweigh any unavoidable, significant, adverse impacts that may occur as a result of the Project, including short-term impacts on air quality from construction-related emissions and cumulative impacts to air quality and noise.Therefore,due to overriding benefits of the Project and because the alternatives identified in the Final EIR are not feasible, as discussed in paragraph h above, the City Council hereby finds that any unavoidable impacts of the Project, including the mitigated but unavoidable impacts from short-term impacts on air quality from construction-related emissions,and cumulative air quality and noise are acceptable based on the findings contained herein and in the "CEQA Findings"for the Project. This determination shall constitute a statement of overriding considerations within the meaning of CEQA and is based on any one of the following environmental and other benefits of the Project identified in the Final EIR and the record of the City Council's proceedings: i) Provision for the use of land consistent with the established policies and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code, and all other City Development guidelines; ii) Annexation of the 90.4-acre Project site and adjacent 10.0-acre utility easement into the City of Rancho Cucamonga; iii) Integration of the Project with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods and establishment of a development that results in logical, coordinated growth; iv) Establishment of a Project-wide circulation system that meets regional and local transportation needs and accommodates both vehicles and pedestrians; v) Provision of a system of public/community facilities, including trails,open space areas,and landscaping to support the residents of the Project and surrounding area in an efficient and timely manner; vi) Provision of backbone public infrastructure (i.e., roads, utilities)to serve Project residents and the surrounding community; vii) Minimization of impacts to, and generation of revenues in excess of costs for, various public service agencies; viii) Provision of quality housing opportunities compatible with existing and planned development that responds to market demands; Resolution No. 04-209 Page 13 of 15 ix) The addition of housing units in accomplishment of the City's Housing Element Goals and fulfillment of regional housing needs; x) City control over the developing lands on the City's perimeter; and xi) Advancement of the regional trail system by the links to be completed by the Project. j. The mitigation measures in the Final EIR that correspond to the environmental impacts which may result from the Project are hereby adopted and made a condition of approval of, or incorporated into, the Project. The City Council also hereby adopts the"Mitigation Monitoring Plan"attached as Exhibit "H" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report for this Project. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan will be used to monitor compliance with the mitigation measures and conditions that have been adopted or made a condition of Project approval as set forth in this Section of this Resolution and in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. k. Pursuant to provisions of the California Public Resources Code Section 21089(b), the findings contained in this Resolution shall not be operative, vested or final until all required filing fees assessed pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4, together with any required handling charges, are paid to the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearings on June 2,2004 and June 16,2004,including written and oral staff reports,together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The proposed change in density of residential development allowed on the project site is consistent with neighboring properties, including the City's proposed 300 acre (Etiwanda Creek) annexation, and is consistent with General Plan Policy 2.5.2.2, which expresses an intention to apply the Low Density designation to portions of Etiwanda and into the City's Sphere of Influence where the level of services, including roads, shopping and recreational opportunities, are not sufficient to justify higher densities. b. The proposed change in land use designation will promote housing opportunities and help achieve the City's regional share of housing needs. c. The amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties because the land uses and intensities of residential uses allowed are consistent and compatible with the type of housing and open space conservation areas abutting the proposed development. d. The proposed change in designations are also consistent with the provisions of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan which encourages retention of open space and the extension of the image of Old Etiwanda into this area, with relatively large lots and opportunities for an equestrian lifestyle. Resolution No. 04-209 Page 14 of 15 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Sections 1, 2 and 3 above, this Council hereby approves General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00749. 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED,AND ADOPTED this 16th day of June 2004. AYES: Alexander, Gutierrez, Howdyshell, Kurth, Williams NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: None William J. Alexan r, Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams OMC, City Clerk I, 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 16th day of June 2004. Executed this 17th day of June 2004, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. ADbra hd2a , CM , City Clerk Resolution No. 04-209 Page 15 of 15 HENDERSON CREEK ANNEXATION DRC2003-00749 (GPA) TwTvvvTwwwvTwvwwvvrrvwwvTvvvvwvTT'wv'vTv�wvTvvvrvwvTvvvTw r,r,rvTrvr wTTwTwTTTwTTrTTTTTTTTTTwTTTwTTT'PTwTTT'P'TTTwTwTTwwwTTTT wTrTwwTTTTwwww'wwwwTTTvwTTTTwTrT v www rw uwTTTwwTTTTw rTTUTTTTwwTTrTTTrTTTr vwTwwvTTTVTvvrTwTrvvTTwT r7wTw l.J.J LL Try 1}r}r vTTTTTTTTTvvwvvvTTTTTwvwv TvvTTwvTTT wwTT`1TvvT TvvvrvTv�.wvv,, rt TTTTTTT,P.TTTTwT.wTTTvrw,P.vrg T,TP.v'vvw 7Tv . ..r wv vrT r rJ J Tw,Tivv/.T,r�,vjv,TP.wYvjvviv,T,.Tv�.wv�.Tyw.T T,vr.T,T�.w7rv,.TY'I,T� �.Y7'1'7w T7T•T�.TTT•w�.TTT7Tj,T,Ti,TYYTT,T'.T,Ti.TTT,TP.T,Ti.T,vP.T,T�.TTT,v�.T,T,.T,v�.T,vP. Cv�.'C�T7TYTTT i:iT• vvrrv,TP.TvvgwpTvw,TTTTP.TTvwT TTT,vvP.TTTY'PVTYTYT7wrrTYTwwrvwvvrrwrvvwwTYw7'iiiy!imvP.Tv yT,TP.v w,TP.TVTvw7T is J:• vrrrTTwTTwTTTTTTVT.rw.�.w.i.TTTTTwXTw.1TTT Trwrwrwr TT,rrTTTTTrTrvTTTr,T v T w T T v T r T T T r v Trw v i'r4 T�T►wrwrw ii:.rwr.:�i€i` +}F} rTTT,rrT vT €iii T-r€iiii L•4 iii!7!!!�:ii: .`.4 w TTTTTTT f T !iiiiiii!: r.r. rTTTTrTv �{:{ rrr7rTrT T r r} TrrrvrrrT T r.J.r• r r w J.J.J J =: !! J.r•r• .L.L•L r.J•J.r '. T r•r•r. :::. •L•L•L•L•L•L•L•L•L L � ...... J.J.f.f•f.f•r.r.J.J. •••••••••••••••• rffJ•.LL••rrfJ•LL.•rrr.•L.rf.L..rr..rr.L..rr.J.rr}r}LL.:i:i!i::_ LJJ {JL. ...r•J.r.J.WLJ. HE. . �. . . .....:.i!::i:.:r?::i..iv!s.i:.ii[a.!.0:.![u.!.�:m:.:.¢:.:ie.m.i:.:i:in.uui.E:.::i:.::.::e::.:ci:iF:.:.::F:_n:!::E:::!:nF:.•S:.m:.n:.n!n.:.:•icuG•�:im.•i.:•' .:::•..::!:.::"^i.-_.::i!:•:i:.•iicv!ii:i:.:! i •L•L•L• •L•L•L•L•L•L•^i!!!ii�::::i!::Fi�?�ii!iii:i ii!�!!::!=!:::!!!ii!!!!ue:! J.r.J.f}JY.J.f.f•h ..... ...... ...:.. L•L•L•L•L•L•L•L•L• L•L•L•L• �•r.hf• J J•ry.f.J.f.J•rY.r.f.fYy.J}1}:}J}f:%}• — .J•f•f•J{:{:{JM4J{f.$ .J.r.f•ff•J•f.r.r.f.r.f•r. M.r.r.r• L•L•L.M L{•L•L.L•L•L•L•LK•L•L•L•L•Y :{:{:{i{:•f.J•%.J.J.i.f.f•J.r.J.f.J.JY .f.f}f} ................ ................. J•r•r.r. .r.r•r• r. . . . ...:..._:::.:... ................. .L.L.L.L L.L.L.Lf{.L+L�L:L�{:{rL'�{.J{:•S{:{:{:{r{:{J{f{ ..._............ i{�{r{iLf{f{i{rLfLr{14?L.tiJLr{?Lf1.{t\.ti1{?Mf{?{ltil{�{ .......................................................................... ............... S{�{S{�•}{S•fY.r.S. .r.r.}.r.J.r.r.f.r.r.r.r.f.r.r.f. ::::::::::::��:::::::::::r.:::::::::::::::::::::::_::.................._........_.._.. .................. L.L.L•L.L L.L.L• L.L.L. ..........................._...........................,:::::::....::::[::::::[:::::[[::[: ............... CITY BOUNDARY HENDERSON CREEK ANNEXATION PROPOSED LOW EXISTING GENERAL PLAN :r; • CONSERVATION TTTTT FLOOD CONTROL/ UTILITY CORRIDOR BE VERY LOW EXHIBIT A