HomeMy WebLinkAbout729 - Ordinances ORDINANCE NO. 729
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ETIWANDA
NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00409, TO
CHANGE THE DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM VERY LOW
RESIDENTIAL (.1-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW
RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) AND FLOOD
CONTROL/RESOURCE CONSERVATION FOR 168.77 ACRES OF
LAND LOCATED NORTH OF THE LOWER SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA EDISON (SCE) CORRIDOR BETWEEN ETIWANDA
AVENUE AND EAST AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 0225-083-05, 06, 07, '10, 22, 23, 25,
AND 26 AND 0225-084-02.
A. RECITALS.
1. Traigh Pacific (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 SUBTT14749, and
associated Development Agreement. The actions also include the development
107.28 acres of the 168.77-acre site with 269 single-family housing units (99.26
acres), park area (3.1 acres), equestrian park (2.7 acres), equestrian trail (0.44
acres), and drainage channel (1.77 acres). The development would have a
gross density of 1.59 dwelling units per acre, and a net density of 2.5 dwelling
units per acre. The remaining 81.49 acres will continue to be used for flood
control purposes. The proposed annexation action encompasses a total of 240
acres and includes the development site plus adjacent parcels owned by
Southern California Edison and San Bernardino County Flood Control District.
These series of actions and approvals are hereinafter defined in this Ordinance
as the "Project."
2. The Applicant has submitted the following applications relating to the Project:
Annexation DRC2003-01051, General Plan Land Use Amendment DRC2003-
00410, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00409, Tentative
Tract Map SUBTT14749, and Development Agreement DRC2003-00411
(collectively the "Project Applications"). These Project Applications, as well as
the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Tentative Tract Map
SUBTT14749, constitute the matters involving the Project, which are submitted
to the City Council for decision and action.
3. The Applicant's request for Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment
DRC2003-00409 is for the amendment to the District Designation for 168.77
acres of land from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Low
Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Flood Control/Resource
Conservation, for that portion of land depicted on Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance.
Ordinance No. 729
Page 2 of 19
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
Low Residential (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) and is the site of the previously
approved Rancho Etiwanda Estates. The property to the east is designated
Conservation and Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) and is the
proposed site of Tentative Tract Map 16324 - Henderson Creek. The property
to the south is designated Flood Control/Utility Corridor, Conservation, and Very
Low Residential and is comprised of a SCE power line corridor, and the
Etiwanda Creek Flood Control basins and conservation area.
5. On June 9, 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 June 9, 2004, the Planning
Commission adopted Resolution No. 04-78, recommending approval of
Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00409 along with other
associated applications.
6. On July 21,2004, 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, and
after the receipt of public testimony, the City Council closed the hearing.
7. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
B. ORDINANCE.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby
find, determine, and ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set fodh in
the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct.
SECTION 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.
2003081085). The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public
review and comment period from December 5, 2003 through
January 28, 2004. Comments were received during that period
Ordinance No. 729
Page 3 of 19
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. 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. 04-240, 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:
i) 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 Final EIR, public
comments, public agency comments, and the entire record
before it, that the Project may create significant impacts in the
Ordinance No. 729
Page 4 of 19
areas Earth Resources, Water Resources,
Transportation/Circulation, Air Quality, Biological Resources,
Hazards, Noise, Public Services, Utilities, Aesthetics, and
Cultural Resources. 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 July 21,2004 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:
i) Earth Resources. The Final EIR finds that development of
the Project would expose people and structures to risks
associated with seismic ground shaking produced by
numerous regional faults. Additionally, development of the
project would require removal of vegetation to prepare for
grading; this would create a short-term increased potential for
topsoil erosion. Potential erosion in the long-term would
result from increased surface runoff rates due to road paving
and construction of impermeable structures. Mitigation
measures are imposed which require a detailed geologic and
geotechnical investigation for each lot prior to the grading of
the Project site. Specifically, the developer must:
demonstrate that each lot is buildable and complies with
recommendations and specifications found in the
geotechnical investigation report included in Appendix C of
the Final EIR (Mitigation Measure 3-1); identify potential
geologic and soil limitations and recommend appropriate
engineering and design measures to adequately protect
structures and inhabitants (Mitigation Measure 3-2); and
identify these construction measures on applicable grading
plans, and implement them to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. Further, mitigation measures are imposed on the
project that require preparation and approval of a Dust
Control Plan and a Landscape and Irrigation Plan to reduce
the likelihood of erosion (Mitigation Measures 3-4 and 3~5).
Based on these mitigation measures, and the additional ones
contained in the Final EIR, the City Council finds that the
effects of seismic shaking on persons and structures and the
possibility of erosion will be mitigated to a level of less than
significant.
Ordinance No. 729
Page 5 of 19
ii) Water Resources. The Final EIR identifies that conversion
of the Project site to urban uses would increase the amount
of sediment, suspended debris, landscape maintenance or
associated chemicals (e.g., fertilizers, herbicides, etc.), and
materials related to automotive wear (e.g., tire rubber, oil,
antifreeze, etc.) that would reach the local drainage system
due to run-off caused by grading or by being washed off
streets during storm events or street-sweeping activities.
Mitigation measures imposed on the applicant would require
the Project developer to apply for and receive a National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and,
if necessary, to obtain Clean Water Act Section 401 and 404
permits (for water quality certification for dredge and fill
operations); additionally, the developer will be required to
implement all applicable Best Management Practices (BMPs)
to prevent construction of the Project from polluting surface
and ground waters. The City Council finds that
implementation of this mitigation measure will mitigate
impacts on water quality to a level of less than insignificant.
Additionally, the Final EIR identifies that the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has identified the
Project site as within a flood zone designated "Flood Zone D."
Mitigation measures will require the developer to install a
revetment along the East Etiwanda Channel adjacent to the
Project site, and implement on- and off-site drainage system
improvements outlined in the Project Drainage Study
(Appendix D of the draft EIR). The City Council finds that the
revetment and drainage improvements will reduce flood
impacts associated with the Project to a level of less than
significant.
iii) Transportation and Circulation. The Final EIR indicates
that the proposed Project would increase vehicle trips and
impact the level of service along arterial streets and
intersections; specifically, the Project is anticipated to
generate a total of 2,956 daily vehicle trips at build-out.
Further, it is assumed that at build-out 68 percent of the
Project traffic would enter/exit the site along Etiwanda
Avenue, while 32 percent would use East Avenue; this
distribution would cause some roads to be more intensely
affected than others. Additionally, the Final EIR found that
the level of service at the intersection of Etiwanda and
Highland Avenues could be reduced to a "D" level during the
morning peak hour at full build-out. Mitigation Measures are
imposed to require the developer to contribute a fair share to
the traffic signal mitigation program of the County of San
Bernardino and/or the City of Rancho Cucamonga to help
Ordinance No. 729
Page 6 of 19
fund the construction of traffic signals at the intersections of:
Day Creek Boulevard/Banyan Avenue; Day Creek
Boulevard/SR-210 West-bound ramp; Day Creek
Boulevard/SR 210 East-bound ramp; Etiwanda
Avenue/Banyan Avenue; Etiwanda AvenueNVilson Avenue;
and East Avenue/Banyan Avenue. Further, the developerwill
be required to pay a "fair share" contribution towards off-site
impacts to linked roadways and intersections as outlined in
the Project traffic report; this "fair share" amount is
approximately $63,818 as of the date of the traffic study. The
City Council finds that based on these mitigation measures,
traffic at the study intersections will be reduced to operate at
a level of service of D or better (with all but one intersection
operating at level of service C or better) and that the impacts
of the Project on Traffic and Circulation will be mitigated to a
level of less than significant.
iv) Air Quality. The Final EIR identifies that the Project may
create significant and unavoidable impacts on 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
short-term and can cause nuisance impacts to adjacent land
uses in the local area by way of fugitive dust produced by
grading of the site. In addition, construction-related
emissions, particularly from architectural coatings (painting)
and off-road diesel equipment, are anticipated to produce
significant levels of reactive organic compounds (ROC) and
nitrogen oxides (NOx) that would exceed SCAQMD
thresholds of significance and result in significant shod-term
air pollution impacts. Comprehensive mitigation measures
(Mitigation Measures 6-1 - 6-10) are imposed on the Project
which will require various dust control measures, emission
control measures, and off-site actions. Included in those
measures are requirements to ensure that all construction
equipment is properly serviced and maintained and that
trucks are not left idling for prolonged periods (i.e., in excess
of 10 minutes), reestablishment of ground cover through
seeding and watering, phased grading to prevent the
susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended pedods
of time, suspension of grading operations during periods of
high wind (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph), and regular
washing and sweeping of the site. The Final EIR also
indicates that the Project would produce long-term impacts
on Air Quality as a result of the additional external vehicle
trips that will be generated, and their attendant production of
Ordinance No. 729
Page 7 of 19
NO× and PM~o in excess of SCAQMD standards. Further,
secondary impact potential would derive from energy
consumption by on-site residential heaters, stoves, water
heaters, and similar consumptive appliances. Mitigation
measures imposed on the Project to reduce long-term
impacts include requiring the developer to demonstrate that
all residential structures have incorporated high-
efficiency/Iow-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances,
and water heaters (Mitigation Measure 6-11), and that all
residential structures have incorporated thermal pane
windows and weather-stripping (Mitigation Measure 6-12).
Further, the developer will be required to make a fair share
contribution to a "park and ride" facility along the 1-15 or 1-10
freeways, as well as construct a bus stop/shelter at the
trailhead park, if directed by OmniTrans. The City Council
finds that with the implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures directed at both short- and long-term
impacts, emissions will be reduced and the Project's
contribution to regional emission of criterial pollutants will be
minimized. However, the City Council finds that despite the
imposition of all of these comprehensive mitigation
requirements, the Project will produce significant short- and
long-term impacts on Air Quality due to emissions, and that
these impacts will remain significant after mitigation.
v) Biolo,qical Resources. The Final EIR indicates that, priorto
the Grand Prix fire in October 2003, the Project site contained
approximately 109 acres of sage scrub (including white
sage), along with California buckwheat, California filago,
valley lessingia, popcorn flower, and common phacelia; the
Project will eliminate this vegetation through development of
the area. Further, the Project will impact sensitive plant
species present on the site (as determined before the 2003
wildfire) including Plummer's mariposa lily, Pious daisy, and
four separate types of spineflowers (Ramona, prostrate,
California, and Parry's). Development of the site will also
impact wildlife corridors and will remove habitat that supports
a number of sensitive species that were either observed
onsite or have a moderate to high potential to occur onsite,
including the sharp-shinned hawk, Southern California
rufous-crowned sparrow, red-shouldered hawk, white-tailed
kite, northern harrier, Cooper's hawk, San Diego horned
lizard, and orange-throated whiptail. The Final EIR indicated
that the California gnatcatcher (a federally listed threatened
species) has not been observed on-site and has a Iow
probability of occurring on the site due to the type of
vegetation present. Also, the Final EIR found that while a
Ordinance No. 729
Page 8 of 19
portion of the Project site (the Etiwanda Creek channel) is
within the historical range fo the endangered San Bernardino
Kangaroo Rat (SBKR), since the creek channel is not
proposed for development, the Project will not cause direct
impacts to the SBKR. The Final EiR further found that
development of the site will remove 0.48 acres of land in four
small drainages that are under Army Corps of Engineers
(ACOE) jurisdiction, but that none of these areas is
considered a wetland. The Final EIR found that the Project is
not consistent with the goals of the North Etiwanda Open
Space and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP) since
it does not include any on-site preservation of open space
lands. Mitigation measures have been imposed on the
project to require the Project developer to acquire and convey
to the County approximately 164 acres of land as off-site
mitigation land. This 164-acre area is intended to accomplish
a 1:5 to 1 ratio to mitigate for the loss of the approximately
109 acres of sage scrub and to mitigate the potential loss of
habitat for sensitive plants and animal species. The City
finds that the recommended mitigation measures will help
reduce potentially significant impacts regarding the loss of
habitat, but that the impacts will remain significant after
mitigation.
vi) Hazards. The Final EIR identifies that the Project would
expose people and structures to potential hazards due to the
possibility of hazardous materials spills on nearby state
highways, and due to the minor use of chemicals and other
materials typical of suburban uses. Additionally, the Project
would expose more people and structures to potential wildfire
hazards, and would expose more people to potentially
dangerous wildlife/human encounters. Mitigation measures
imposed will require submission of a plan detailing proper
clean-up efforts for any hazardous or toxic substance that is
discovered or released during construction (Mitigation
Measure 9-1); development of fuel modification zones, and
the requirement of"firewise" landscaping and the use of fire-
resistant building materials to reduce fire hazards (Mitigation
Measures 9-2 - 9-4); and the posting of signs warning of the
potential risk of wildlife/human interactions on the site
(Mitigation Measure 9-8). The City Council finds that after
implementation of these measures, potentially significant
impacts relating to Hazards will be reduced to a level of less
than significant.
vii) 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
Ordinance No. 729
Page 9 of 19
equipment associated with construction activities; earth-
moving equipment is anticipated to create noise up to 90-dB.
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 10-2).
Based on this mitigation measure, the City Council finds that
the short term noise impacts from the Project will be reduced
to less than significant levels. The Final EIR also identified
that noise levels would increase in the long-term due to
additional motor vehicle noise and from general human
activity. In the opening year (2005), noise levels at fifty feet
from the centerline of area roadways would range from a Iow
of 58.1 CNEL along Wilson Avenue east of Etiwanda Avenue
to a high of 78.3 CNEL along Highland Avenue east of
Etiwanda Avenue. A mitigation measure will be imposed to
require the developer to document that exterior residential
areas will have exterior noise levels of less than 65 dB CNEL
(Mitigation Measure 10-5), and that interior living area noise
levels are less than 45 dB CNEL (Mitigation Measure 10-6).
Further, the developer will be required to incorporate site
designs and measures to help reduce proposed noise levels
over the long-term. The City Council finds that based on
these mitigation measures, the potential noise impacts of the
Project on current and future residents will be mitigated to a
level of less than significant.
viii) Public Services. The Final EIR identifies that due to
population increases associated with the Project, the
proposed Project would incrementally increase the need for
public services in the areas of fire protection, police
protection, schools, libraries, medical services, and roads. A
mitigation measure is imposed to require the developer to pay
all legally established public service fees, including police,
fire, schools, parks, and library fees (Mitigation Measure 11-
1). Additionally, in order to reduce the number of fire
incidents requiring response by the City's Fire Depadment,
the project developer would be required to obtain approval
from the Fire Department with regard to adequate fire flow
and installation of acceptable fire-resistant structural
materials in project buildings (Mitigation Measure 11-3).
Additionally, the developer will be required to post a bond in
an amount sufficient to ensure installation and maintenance
of public and private roads, and drainage facilities necessary
for each phase of the project (Mitigation Measure 11-5). The
City Council finds that the imposition and implementation of
these mitigation measures will mitigate the Project's impacts
on Public Services to a level of less than significant.
Ordinance No. 729
Page 10 of 19
ix) Utilities. The Final EIR identifies that the Project would
create potentially significant impacts as a result of new
residential water requirements of approximately 602,819
gallons of water per day; this water would be provided from
an existing two million gallon water reservoir via an existing
water main, however, as growth continues in the Project area,
additional offsite water storage facilities would be required.
Fudher, the Final EIR indicates that based on an estimate of
270 gallons of wastewater per unit per day being produced,
the Project would require construction of a sewer main to
transport the wastewater to an existing sewage treatment
plant. Additionally, the Project would generate the need for
increased electricity, natural gas, and telephone and
television cables, and would increase the amount of solid
waste produced. A mitigation measure imposed requires the
contribution of funds for sewer service (Mitigation Measure
12-1). Further mitigation measures require submission of
development plans to Southern California Edison, the Gas
Company, and Verizon in order to facilitate engineering
design and construction of improvements necessary to
provide electrical, natural gas, and telephone service to the
Project; these companies must also provide "will-serve"
letters in order for building permits to issue. The City Council
finds that imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce
the impacts of the Project on Utilities to a level of less than
significant.
x) Aesthetics. The Final EIR identifies that the Project may
create significant and unavoidable impacts on Aesthetics. In
the short-term, the landscape would be altered by grading
and clearing, and views of the Project site would include the
heavy construction equipment and machinery used to
prepare the Project site for construction of new homes.
Long-term impacts would occur due to a fundamental change
in the visual and aesthetic character of the area, and would
transform the existing natural terrain into a developed and
planned community. Additionally, the presence of homes
would mean more lighting at night, as well as increased glare
due to additional windows in the community. Mitigation
measures will require that outdoor lighting comply with the
requirements of the Etiwanda Nodh Specific Plan design
guidelines and the City's General Plan (Mitigation Measure
13-1), and that a detailed landscaping and wall treatment
plan be prepared (Mitigation Measure 13-5). Even with the
imposition and implementation of these and other mitigation
measures, the City Council finds that the impact of the Project
on Aesthetics will remain significant after mitigation.
Ordinance No. 729
Page 11 of 19
xi) Cultural Resources. The Final EIR identifies that while the
existence of paleontological resources is unlikely on the
Project site, such resources may be discovered during
construction of the Project. Also, one historic archeo[ogical
site was previously recorded on the property, CA-SBR-
3131H. This prior survey found what appeared to be the
remains of a construction camp used by the Etiwanda Water
Company in the 1880s; the structure consisted of rock walls,
hand-forged metal barrel hoops and nails, barbed wire, and
glass fragments. Mitigation measures imposed require that a
qualified paleontologist conduct a preconstruction field survey
of the Project site and submit a report of findings and specific
recommendations for further mitigation measures (Mitigation
Measure 14-1). Should any prehistoric archaeological
resources be found before or during grading, a qualified
archaeologist would be retained to monitor construction
activities, and take appropriate measures to protect or
preserve the resources. The City Council finds that with the
implementation of these mitigation measures, the Project will
have a less than significant impact on paleontological,
archaeological, and historical resources.
xii) Cumulative Impacts - Air Quality, Biolo.qical Resources,
and Aesthetics. The Final EIR provides that this Project,
together with the construction of other development projects
in the vicinity, would create cumulative short-term impacts to
air quality during construction. This Project would also create
a significant cumulative impact to regional air quality due to
additional vehicle emissions adding incremental pollutants
within the South Coast Air Basin. With respect to biological
resources, the Final EIR concluded that the Project would
contribute to cumulatively considerable biological impacts
with loss of habitat and restriction of wildlife movement in the
fan area due to encroachment of human structures and
activities. With respect to aesthetics, the proposed project
will contribute incrementally to cumulatively considerable
aesthetic impacts related to the visual character of the area
going from largely vacant, rural terrain to Iow density
suburban development
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), biological resources related to the
loss of habitat, and aesthetics related to short-term views (i.e.
construction activities and dust) and long-term views related to
transforming the existing natural terrain into a residential
community
Ordinance No. 729
Page 12 of 19
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 "Rural Density Alterative," development under the
existing land use designation. 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) Annexation of 240 acres including the 168.77-acre
Project site and adjacent utility easements and corridors
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;
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
Ordinance No. 729
Page 13 of 19
h) To provide quality housing opportunities compatible with
existing and planned development that responds to
market demands.
ii) Under the "No Project-No Development Alternative" the
project site would remain vacant which would avoid all
significant project specific impacts, although cumulative
impacts including traffic, noise, and air quality would
eventually occur, but not to the same degree as if the
proposed Project were built. This alternative would eliminate
essentially all of the adverse impacts of the proposed Project
and is, therefore, an environmentally superior alternative.
This alternative does not meet the Project's basic objectives
of developing a residential project consistent with the General
Plan land use designation for the site.
iii) Under the "No Project - Open Space Alternative" the site
would remain vacant but be acquired, fenced, and maintained
for open space and biological habitat as part of the
NEOSHPP plan. This alternative would avoid all the
significant impacts of developing the property, however,
cumulative impacts including traffic, noise, and air quality, will
eventually occur regardless of whether the site is developed
or preserved, although perhaps not to the same degree as
with the proposed Project. This is an environmentally
superior alternative but does not meet the Project's basic
objectives, and indeed all other objectives, of developing a
project consistent with the General Plan land use designation
for the site.
iv) Under the "Reduced Intensity Alternative" almost all of the
significant or potentially significant impacts associated with
the proposed project would be eliminated. The remaining
significant impact (i.e., construction emissions) could
probably not be eliminated or significantly reduced by the
implementation of any feasible alternative or mitigation
measures at this time, unless the project were to support all
custom lots of one acre or more where only building pads are
graded when needed. However, the Project fiscal report
indicates that fewer, larger residential lots/units would not
generate sufficient public revenues to offset costs to provide
services. While this alternative is environmentally superior to
the proposed Project, it does not meet the Project's economic
objectives of developing a residential project that has a
positive cost/benefit ratio for the City and generates a
reasonable return on investment. Also, since this alternative
does not fully implement the City's goal of providing adequate
park facilities for City residents.
Ordinance No. 729
Page 14 of 19
v) The "Modified Site Plan Alternative" would create a 300ofoot
wide buffer along the west bank of the East Etiwanda Creek
to better buffer wildlife movement and create more open
space. It would cluster the residential development in the
southwestern portion of the site and would have 200 units
with a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet and a height limit
of one story. It would eliminate the significant impacts of the
proposed project-related long-term air quality (NOx and ROG
emissions). However, potentially significant impacts related
to short-term air pollutant emissions (ROG) and loss of
biological resources would remain. Also, this alternative does
not meet the Project's economic objectives of developing a
residential project that has a positive cost/benefit ratio for the
City and generates a reasonable return on investment. This
alternative is marginally superior to the proposed Project in
terms of environmental impacts, but it does not meet the
Project objectives.
vi) The "Rural Density Alterative" would development the site
under the City's currently designated of Very Low density
residential (VL) which allows a maximum of 2 units per acre
of developable land with minimum 20,000 square foot lots.
This alternative would locate approximately 75 units on 37
acres in the southern portion of the site, while the remaining
70 acres would be set aside as open space and biological
habitat. This alternative would eliminate the significant
impacts of the proposed Project related to biological
resources related to loss of alluvial fan habitat and long-term
air quality from NOx and ROG emissions. This alternative
still has significant impacts related to short-term air pollutant
emissions (ROG) and does not provide the benefits of two
parks. Also, this alternative does not meet the Project's
economic objectives of developing a residential project that
has a positive cost/benefit ratio for the City and generates a
reasonable return on investment. As such, it does not meet
the Project's goals. This alternative is environmentally
superior to the proposed Project, but it does not meet the
Project objectives.
i. 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 July 21, 2004 City
Council Staff Report), which is incorporated herein by this
reference, outweigh any unavoidable, significant, adverse
Ordinance No. 729
Page 15 of 19
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 related to vehicle emissions;
impacts to biological resources related to removal of habitat; and
short-term impacts to aesthetics (i.e. construction dust obscuring
views) and long-term impacts to aesthetics (changes to the
natural terrain). Therefore, due to overriding benefits of the
Project and because the alternatives identified in the Final EIR
are not feasible, as discussed in paragraph j above, the City
Council hereby finds that any unavoidable impacts of the Project,
including the mitigated but unavoidable impacts to short-term and
tong-term impacts on air quality and aesthetics, and project
related and cumulative impacts to biological resources, 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 240 acres including the 168.77-acre Project
site and adjacent utility easements and corridors 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;
Ordinance No. 729
Page 16 of 19
viii) Provision of quality housing opportunities compatible with
existing and planned development that responds to market
demands;
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 "G" 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 Ordinance and in the Mitigation Monitoring
Plan.
k. Pursuant to provisions of the California Public Resources Code
Section 21089(b), the findings contained in this Ordinance 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.
SECTION 3: Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during
the above-referenced public hearing on July 21, 2004, including
written and oral staff repods, 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, 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 oppodunities, are not sufficient to justify higher
densities.
Ordinance No. 729
Page 17 of 19
b. The proposed change in land use designation will promote
housing opportunities and help achieve the City's regional share
of housing needs.
¢. 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.
SECTION 4: Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Sections 1, 2
and 3 above, this Council hereby approves Etiwanda North Specific
Plan Amendment DRC2003-00409 to establish a Low Residential
District on that portion of land described in this Ordinance and
depicted on Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance.
SECTION 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this
Ordinance is, for any reason, deemed or held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction,
or preempted by legislative enactment, such decision or legislation
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each
section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or words thereof,
regardless of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections,
clauses, phrases, or words might subsequently be declared invalid or
unconstitutional or preempted by subsequent legislation.
SECTION 6: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall
cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at
least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general
circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated
in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Please see the following page
for formal adoption, cerlification and signatures
Ordinance No. 729
Page 18 of 19
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 4th day of August 2004.
AYES: Alexander, Gutierrez, Howdyshell, Williams
NOES: None
ABSENT: Kurth
ABSTAINED: None
William ,L,~r~lnder, Ma 'or
/
Al-rEST:
Debra O. Adams(~,CMC, City Clerk
I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a Regular Meeting of the Council of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 21st day of July 2004, and was passed at a Regular
Meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 4th day August of 2004.
Executed this 5th day of August 2004, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Ordinance No. 729
Page 19 of 19
1000 0 1000 2000 Feet
I
PROPOSED LOW
PROPOSED RESOURCE CONSERVATION
ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT
EXHIBIT '~_" DRC2003-00409