HomeMy WebLinkAbout863 - Ordinances ORDINANCE NO. 863
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
CODE AMENDMENT DRC2013-00873, A SUPPLEMENTAL
UPDATE TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE; AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
1. On October 23, 2013, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing with respect to the above referenced Development Code
Amendment and, following the conclusion thereof, adopted its Resolution No. 13-50,
recommending that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt said amendment.
2. On November 20, 2013, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted
a duly noticed public hearing on the Amendment.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
B. Ordinance.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct.
SECTION 2: Based upon substantial evidence presented to the City Council during the
above-referenced public hearing on November 20, 2013, including written and oral staff reports,
together with public testimony, the City Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The City desires to adopt a supplemental update to the Development Code in
order to (i) reinstate development standards that were unintentionally omitted from the
Development Code; (ii) revise conflicting information across sections and chapters of the Code;
and (iii) Permit emergency shelters as a "by right" use within the General Commercial Zoning
District; and
b. The City has prepared a set of amendments (the "Amendments"), which is
included as Attachment 1.
SECTION 3: The City has prepared an Addendum (the "Addendum")to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH#2000061027) (the "Final EIR"),
attached hereto as Attachment 2 to this Ordinance, which confirms that the environmental impacts
stemming from the Development Code Update were adequately addressed in the Final EIR, and
that a subsequent EIR or negative declaration is not required for the Development Code Update.
The City Council finds that the Addendum complies with the California Environmental Quality Act,
its implementing regulations at 14 California Code of Regulations § 15000 et seq., and the City's
local CEQA guidelines (collectively"CEQA").
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 1 of 17
SECTION 4: The City Council hereby adopts the Amendments to the Development Code
attached to this Ordinance and incorporated herein by reference as Attachment 1.
SECTION 5: The Council hereby directs the City Clerk to make all necessary,
non-substantive conforming revisions to the Municipal Code necessary to codify this Ordinance,
including, but not limited to, clerical corrections to section numbers, table, and figure references,
and cross references.
SECTION 6: 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 7: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause
the same to be published in the manner prescribed by law.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 2 of 17
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 4'h day of December 2013.
AYES: Alexander, Michael, Spagnolo, Steinorth,Williams
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
i.iu iA.a� /
L. Dennis Mich- - Ma/.r
/
ATTEST:
UL n ds it jerk
J ice C. Reynolds, Cil lerk
I, JANICE C. REYNOLDS, 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 20'h day of November 2013, and was
passed at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the
41° day of December 2013.
Executed this 5'h day of December 2013, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
i
a e C. Reynolds, City rk
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 3 of 17
Adopted Revisions to Rancho Cucamonga Development Code
Staff is recommending the following amendments to the Development Code. These
amendments are shown in track changes as excerpts from relevant sections of the
Development Code with new language shown with underlined text and existing language to be
removed shown with strike out text.
Article Ill Zoning Districts, Uses and Standards
Chapter 17.30 Allowed Land Use by Base Zoning District
TABLE 17.30.030-1 ALLOWED LAND USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS BY
BASE ZONING DISTRICT
Land
— at C c c ta C a rx c. t Use/Zonin g 5 — " E C 2 c
= C x u =
District
Residential Uses
Emergency N N N N N N N N N P N N N N N C N N N N N N
Shelter
Chapter 17.32 Allowed Use Descriptions
Section 17.32.020 Allowed Use Descriptions
9. Service Station. A retail business selling gasoline or other motor vehicle fuels.
May include a convenience store. Vehicle services which are incidental to fuel
services are included under Vehicle Services — Minor.
50. Secondhand Dealer. Any business where the primary or ancillary use includes
buying, selling, trading, accepting for sale on consignment, accepting for
auctioning, or auctioning secondhand tangible personal property such as"cash
for gold". This use classification does not include a "coin dealer" or participants
at gun shows or events, pawnshops or secondhand stores.
Section 17.36.030 Development Standards for Commercial and Office Zoning Districts
D. Other Miscellaneous Commercial and Office Development Standards.
1. Equipment Screening. Any equipment, whether on the roof, side of building, or
ground shall be screened. The method of screening shall be architecturally integrated
in terms of material, color, shape and size. The screening design shall blend with the
building design. Where individual equipment is provided, a continuous screen is
desirable.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 4 of 17
Section 17.36.040 Development Standards for Industrial Districts
TABLE 17.36.040-1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
Development Standard/Zoning District IP GI MI/HI HI
•
Lot Area (minimum)(') 0.5 ac 0.5 ac
5 ac°� 5 ac or
Lot Width (minimum)I') 100 ft 100 ft 100 ft 100 ft
Setback(minimum distance between structure and property line in feet) (4)
Front Yard See Table 17.36.040-2
Side Yard 5 ft (5) 5 ft (5) 5 ft (5) 5 ft (5)
Street Side Yard (and rear yard abutting See Table 17.36.040-2
street)
Rear Yard Oft /5I 0 ft (5) Oft (5) 0 ft (5)
Distance Between Buildings
Primary Buildings Must meet current Building Code
Accessory Buildings requirements
Building Height(maximum in feet)
Primary Buildings 35 ft at the front setback. (6) Maximum
height is 75 feet.
Accessory Buildings 14 ft 18 ft 18 ft 24 ft
Floor Area Ratio (maximum ratio of building to lot square footage)
Floor Area Ratio 40-60% 50-60% n/a 40-50%
Open Space Requirement(minimum percentage of open space per parcel or project)
Open Space/Landscape Area 15% 10% 105%34 / 1001 215
/o
Other
Performance Standards (see Chapter 17.66) A B C/B (2) C
Table Notes:
(1) Condominium Lots. Condominium lots and lots within an approved Master Planned
Development are exempt from required minimum parcel size and dimension requirements.
(2) The following applies within 1,000 feet of Arrow Route: minimum 2-acre lot area; 10%
minimum landscape area; and the `B"level Performance Standards (Chapter 17.66).
(3) Setbacks shall be the minimum required under the City's currently adopted Building Code.
(4) Setback shall be increased to 45 feet when abutting a residential property line.
(5) See Table 17.36.040-2 for parcels abutting special boulevards as indicated in Figure
17.36.040-1 (Special Streetscape Requirements).
(6) Buildings exceeding 35 feet high shall be set back an additional 1 ft from the front setback
for each 1 ft of height up to a maximum setback of 70 feet.
(7) Heights over 75 feet may be permitted with a Conditional Use Permit.
D. Other Miscellaneous Industrial Development Standards.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 5 of 17
1. Special Streetscape. Future development and redevelopment within industrial
areas shall be consistent with the special streetscape standards listed in Table
17.36.040-2 (Streetscape Setback Requirements) and as depicted in Figure
17.36.040-1 (Special Streetscape Requirements).
TABLE 17.36.040-2 STREETSCAPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS
Average Depth of Building Setback(2.3' Parking Setback
Street Type Landscape (1,2) 4,6) (5)
Major Arterial & Special 45 ft 45 ft 25 ft
Boulevard
Secondary 35 ft 35 ft 20 ft
Local/Collector 25 ft 25 ft 15 ft
Table Notes:
(1) The average depth shall be uninterrupted from the face of curb, except for sidewalks,
pedestrian hardscape, plazas and courtyards, and monument signs.
(2) Parcels less than 225 feet in depth from the ultimate curb face on special boulevards are
not required to provide an average depth of landscaping or building setback greater than
25 feet or 20% the depth of the property, whichever is greater.
(3) As determined from ultimate face of curb.
(4) Average depth of landscaping must still be provided.
(5) Street frontage walls and fences over 3 feet in height are subject to building setbacks.
(6) Setback may be increased based on building height. See Table 17.36.040-1.
TABLE 17.36.010-3 RESIDENTIAL STREETSCAPE SETBACK STANDARDS
Land Use and Street Classification Building Parking Landscape and
Setback Setback Wall Setback (1)
Detached Single-Family Residential
20
Major/Special Boulevard 45 ft 18 ft
18 ft average
18 ft minimum
Secondary/Collector 35 ft 15 ft 18 ft average
15 ft minimum
Attached Single-Family Residential and Multi-Family Residential
Major/Special Boulevard (Z) 45 ft 30 ft 45 ft average
ft minimmuum m (2)
Secondary/Collector (2) 35 ft 25 ft 35 ft average
lZ)
25 ft minimum
Table Notes:
(1) On existing lots of record, parcels less than 175 feet in depth need not provide a setback
of landscaping greater than 20% of the depth of the property(excluding right-of-way).
(2) Add 10 feet to the setback when located within the M, MH, and H districts.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 6 of 17
6. Rail Service. Properties which adjoin existing or proposed lead or spur lines
shall provide rail service access. Rail crossings and any spur construction
must be approved by the railroad and the Public Utilities Commission. The
following rail service standards, unless modified by the railroad or the Public
Utilities Commission, shall apply:
a. Minimum easement width for a lead line, single track shall be thirty two
(32) feet.
b. Minimum easement width for a double rail track shall be forty one (41)
feet.
c. The minimum radius of curvature for a track shall be one hundred eighty
(180) feet.
d. The maximum gradient along spur tracks shall not exceed two (2)
percent.
e. Dock height shall be no less than four and one half(4.5)feet above the
top of the spur track.
f. Road crossings at grade should be avoided wherever possible.
g. Spur trackage is not permitted along any building frontage and must be
confined to the side or rear portions of the buildings.
h. Lot divisions and building layouts for properties which adjoin existing or
proposed lead and spur lines shall be done in a manner to ensure full
potential of future rail access and use and should not preclude rail
access to other properties adjacent to such rail lines. Subdivisions,
which could reduce a property's ability to accommodate potential rail
served developments, may not be authorized.
Building design shall include rail service features to ensure the potential
use of available spur lines.
j. Finished floor elevations and dock height door or"kick our wall panels
shall be provided in all properties abutting rail lines.
k. The above-referenced rail service development standards may be
amended or deleted on a site-by-site basis during the development
review process. The following must be determined by the Planning
Commission in order to authorize any modification of the rail service
standard:
i. That the installation of a lead or spur track cannot be accomplished
due to physical constraints on or adjacent to the project site; and
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 7 of 17
ii. Other existing or potential rail service properties will not be
negatively affected in their ability to accommodate rail service
activity as a result of modifications to the standards.
7. Equipment Screening. The following equipment screening standards shall
apply:
a. All roof, wall and ground mounted equipment shall be screened from all
sides within the Industrial Park (IP) and General Industrial (GI) zoning
districts.
b. Wherever possible, all roof, wall and ground mounted equipment shall
be screened from all sides within the Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial
(MI/HI) and Heavy Industrial (HI) zoning districts.
c. All screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design
and where possible a roof parapet wall shall be used to screen roof or
wall mounted equipment. Where roof mounted mechanical equipment
and/or ductwork projects more than 18 inches above the roof or roof
parapet, it shall be screened by an architecturally design enclosure
which exhibits a permanent nature with the building design and is
detailed consistent with the building. Where roof mounted mechanical
equipment and/or ductwork projects less than 18 inches above the roof
or roof parapet it shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of
the building.
Article IV Site Development Provisions
Chapter 17.48 Fences, Walls, and Screening
Section 17.48.040 Materials and Maintenance
3. Chain-link fences and/or gates are not permitted for screening purposes in any
zoning district, including chain-link when backed with wood or plastic slats,
solid plastic sheet, or knitted fabric privacy/wind screening, except in the Heavy
Industrial District.
Section 17.48.050 Requirements by Land Use Type
C. Residential.
1. Trail fences and gates shall be kept in good repair at all times, including
replacing damaged members and maintaining plumb. This shall not preclude
the property owner from replacing the existing trail fence with another fence or
wall material.
2. Height. The height of fences in residential district is limited according to the
following table.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 8 of 17
TABLE 17.48.050-1 MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF FENCES AND WALLS IN REQUIRED YARD AREA
Location or Maximum Height
Location of Fence/Wall/Screening Minimum Setback (1)
of Fence (1),(2)
Required front yard area 0 ft (2) 3 ft/6 ft (3)
Required rear and interior side yard area (along 0 ft 6 ft
rear and interior property lines)
Required street side yard area (along corner side 5 ft (2) 6 ft
property lines)
At intersections of streets, alleys, and driveways Varies(4) 36 in
within the clear visibility triangle
All other areas of lot 0 ft 6 ft
Table Notes:
(1) As part of Site Development Review, Design Review (Minor or Major), or other
discretionary entitlement, the designated approving authority may grant additional height
or location requirements to enclose or screen specific areas or uses or for fences and
walls designed for noise attenuation.
(2) Setback area for street side yard is measured property line to the fence or wall.
(3) Height of front yard fence or wall may be increased to a maximum of 6 feet if the top 3 feet
of fencing is constructed of material that is 90% visually open and transparent(e.g., picket
fence, open wood slats, open wrought iron) including any architectural features designed
as part of the fence (e.g., pilasters and lights).
(4) See definition of clear vision triangle in Section 17.126 (Universal Definitions).
3. Outdoor Recreation Courts. Fencing for outdoor recreation courts (e.g. tennis courts,
basketball courts) shall not exceed twelve (12) feet in height and shall be located five
(5) feet from any rear or side property lines, except when adjacent to outdoor
recreation courts on adjacent properties.
Chapter 17.56 Landscaping Standards
Section 17.56.040 Landscape Plan Review Process
A. Landscaping Plans Subject to Review. When the requirements of this Chapter are
applicable as established in Section 17.56.020 (Applicability), the following landscape
plan review process shall be conducted in conjunction with design review for the
proposed action, pursuant to the requirements of Section 17.16.140 (Design Review).
2. Approving Authority. The designated approving authority shall be the same as
the designated approving authority of the entitlement for new projects or
existing development as identified in Section 17.56.020 (Applicability). For
projects in the wildland-urban interface fire area, the Fire Chief is an additional
approving authority.
3. Approval of Preliminary and Final Plans. The designated approving authority
shall review and approve the preliminary landscape and irrigation plan. Upon
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 9 of 17
approval of the preliminary landscape and irrigation plan, a final landscape and
irrigation plan shall be submitted to the approving authority prior to issuance of
Building Permits for new projects or applicable expansions to existing
development as established in Section 17.56.020 (Applicability).
4. Approval Required. The landscaping shall not be installed until the applicant
receives approval of the final landscape and irrigation plan by the approving
authority and any applicable permits have been issued.
5. Changes to Final Plans. Changes to the approved final landscape and
irrigation plans that affect the character or quantity of the plant material or
irrigation system design are required to be resubmitted for approval before
installation.
Chapter 17.58 Outdoor Lighting Standards
Section 17.58.020 Applicability
The requirements of this Chapter apply to all new and existing development. Whenever a
person is required to obtain a Building Permit, Electrical Permit, and/or approval of a planning
entitlement, the applicant shall submit sufficient information for the approving authority to
determine whether the proposed lighting will comply with the requirements of this Chapter.
Chapter 17.64 Parking and Loading Standards
Section 17.64.030 Permit and Plan Check Requirements
B. Site Development Review. Modification or improvements to an existing parking lot
that impact the parking space layout, configuration, vehicular or pedestrian circulation,
emergency vehicle/fire access lanes, number of stalls, or landscape planters shall
require a Site Development Review. Plans shall include any proposed traffic calming
devices or measures such as speed bumps that will be placed in emergency
vehicle/fire access lanes.
Section 17.64.040 General Parking and Loading Requirements
C. Parking Space and Drive Aisle Dimensions.
1. When outdoors (e.g., parking lot), each parking space shall have a minimum
size of nine feet (9') by seventeen feet (18') with a required one foot (1')
overhang (e.g., over a curb stop) and shall be free of obstructions such as
columns or walls.
2. All parking stalls shall be permanently maintained with double lines, with two
lines located an equal of nine inches (9") on either side of the stall sidelines.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 10 of 17
TABLE 17.64.040-1: ANGLED PARKING SPACE AND DRIVE AISLE DIMENSIONS
Angle Stall Width Stall to Curb Aisle
Two
Aisle Rows +
g a b c
d
9'-0" 19'-0" 251-0"(1) 63'-0"
90° 9'-6" 19'-0" 241-8"(1) 62'-6"
10'-0" 19'-0" 241-0"(1) 62'-0"
9'-0" 21'0" 20'-0"I'I 62"-0"
9'-0" 21'-0" 191-0"(2) 61'-0"
60° 9'-6" 21'-3" 181-6"(2) 61'-0"
10'-0" 21'-6" 181-0"(2) 61'-0"
9'-0" 19'-10" 20'-0"(1) 59'-8"
9'-0" 19'-10" 16.-4"(2) 56'-0"
45° 9'-6" 20'-2" 151-2"(2) 55'-6"
10'-0" 20'-6" 141-0"(2) 55'-0"
Table Notes:
(1) Two-way aisle
(2) One-way aisle
Section 17.64.050 Number of Parking Spaces Required
D. The following number of parking spaces shall be required to serve the uses or
buildings listed, as established in Table 17.64.050-1 (Parking Requirements by Land
Use). Multiple property owners may apply for a use permit for shared parking pursuant
to Section 17.64.060 (Reductions in Parking Requirements). Otherwise, all uses must
provide the sum of the requirements for each individual use. Where the requirements
result in a fractional space, the next larger whole number shall be the number of
spaces required. In addition, the requirements listed below shall apply.
3. "Square feet" means "gross square feet" and refers to the sum gross square
feet of the floor area of a building and its accessory buildings unless otherwise
specified.
6. For the purpose of calculating residential parking requirements, dens, studies,
or other similar rooms that may be used as bedrooms shall be considered
bedrooms.
7. Where the number of seats is listed to determine required parking, seats shall
be construed to be fixed seats. Where fixed seats provided are either benches
or bleachers, one seat shall be construed to equal eighteen (18) linear inches
for pews and twenty-four inches (24") for dining, but in no case shall seating
be less than determined as required by the Building Code.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 11 of 17
8. When the calculation of the required number of off-street parking spaces
results in a fraction of a space, the total number of spaces shall be rounded up
to the nearest whole number.
9. Where private streets are proposed for residential development, resident and
guest parking shall be provided as determined by the approving authority in
conjunction with the required planning entitlement(s).
10. For projects on commercial, office and industrial zoned properties, square
footage dedicated to office hallways 44 inches or less, electrical and
mechanical rooms, elevator shafts, stairwells, bathrooms and storage closets
may be deducted from the gross square footage for parking stall calculation
purposes.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 12 of 17
Addendum to the
Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update
Environmental Impact Report
ADDENDUM
This Addendum to the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Environmental Impact Report
(SCH#2000061027) (the "EIR") has been prepared in connection with the City's supplemental
amendment to the Development Code (the "Project"). The Addendum confirms that the
environmental impacts stemming from the Project were adequately addressed in the EIR and
that a subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration is not required for the Project.
Proposed Supplemental Development Code Amendments
The Project consists of supplemental amendments to the City's recently adopted
comprehensive Development Code, which was in turn adopted to implement the policies of the
recently completed 2010 General Plan Update. Since adoption of the Development Code
Update in July 2012, City staff has identified several errors and omissions in the Development
Code that were never intended to be eliminated from the Code. Staff has also identified areas
where text is inconsistent or incomplete and requires further clarification to properly
communicate the intended development requirements. Further, staff identified one land use,
Emergency Shelters that as currently written, is inconsistent with State law. State law requires
all jurisdictions to allow Emergency Shelters "by right" in at least one zoning district. In the
Housing Element of the General Plan, we identified the GC (General Commercial) zone as the
appropriate zone to allow this type of land use "by right"; however, the Development Code was
not updated accordingly. The purpose of the Project is to correct these errors and omissions
and clarify text where necessary. It is therefore considered to be largely procedural in nature.
The Project will not affect the current methods of conducting environmental review for new
development applications. Table A-1 summarizes the changes proposed in the project and the
reason for including into the Development Code.
Table A-1: Summary of Proposed Changes to the Development Code
Article Chapter Topic Change Proposed Reason
III 17.30 Emergency Need to allow for Emergency Consistency with State
Shelters Shelters "by right" in GC law; unintentionally omitted
zone. from Development Code.
III 17.32 Definition Revise the definition of"Service Consistency with prior
Stations"to include definition of gas/service
convenience stores, or create a stations.
unique service station definition
with convenience stores.
III 17.36 Industrial Revise front setback on the Error in transcription from
Building table to max 70 feet, set max old to new code.
Height building height to 75 feet (or
more with a CUP).
III 17.36 Rail Reincorporate Rail Service Unintentionally omitted
Standards Standards. from the old code.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 13 of 17
Article Chapter Topic Change Proposed Reason
III 17.36 Backup Reincorporate the language Unintentionally omitted
distance for that requires 24 feet from the old code.
vehicles clearance from driveways for
backup purposes.
IV 17.48 Fence/Wall Correct inconsistency between Clarifying text to
Height text and definition of Clear eliminate an
Visibility Triangle for inconsistency.
fence/walVhedge height
IV 17.48 Recreational Add development standards Unintentionally omitted
Fencing for recreational court fencing from the old code.
from the old code.
IV 17.56 Landscape Clarify when final landscape Clarifying text to
Plan Review plans are required to be eliminate an
Process submitted (after entitlement inconsistency.
approval, not before).
IV 17.58 Outdoor Clarify that this chapter Clarifying text to
Lighting applies to existing eliminate an
development, not just new inconsistency.
development.
IV 17.58 Industrial Reinstate development Unintentionally omitted
Dock Lighting standards for wall mounted from the old code.
industrial dock lighting.
IV 17.64 Parking stall Inconsistency between the Clarifying text to
length text and table for minimum eliminate an
parking stall length dimension inconsistency
IV 17.64 Parking Reinstate the language that Unintentionally omitted
exempts restrooms, hallways, from the old code.
stairwells, etc. from parking
calculations.
IV 17.64 Double Add typical standards for Unintentionally omitted
striping double striping of parking from the old code.
spaces from the old code
III 17.36 Equipment Reinstate development Unintentionally omitted
Screening requirement that equipment from the old code.
screening to be architecturally
compatible and integrated with
the building design.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 14 of 17
The 2010 General Plan Update and Environmental Impact Report
On May 19, 2010, the City Council adopted the 2010 General Plan Update and certified the EIR.
The updated plan serves as the foundation for many of the City's regulatory documents,
including the Development Code, specific plans, community plans, master plans, and design
guidelines. With the 2010 General Plan Update, the City's focus shifted to infill development
(development of remaining vacant properties within developed business districts and residential
neighborhoods).
The EIR evaluated potential for the 2010 General Plan Update to result in environmental
impacts, as summarized in the following table:
No Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significant and
Unavoidable
Agricultural Resources Cultural Resources Aesthetics
Biological Resources Hazards and Hazardous Agricultural Resources
Geology and Soils Materials Air Quality
Population, Housing and Hydrology and Water Quality Climate Change
Employment Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources
Public Services Noise
Parks and Recreation
Transportation and Traffic
Utilities and Service Systems
The City made findings regarding the environmental impacts of adopting the General Plan as
well as overriding considerations for significant and unavoidable impacts, both individually and
cumulatively, for the following issues: Aesthetics, Agricultural Resources, Air Quality, Climate
Change, and Mineral Resources.
The findings made by the City necessary to certify the EIR and adopt the General Plan also
included a mitigation monitoring and reporting program. For impacts to Land Use and Planning,
the City determined that changes or alterations have been incorporated into the General Plan
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR
resulting in a less than significant impact. More specifically the City's findings stated there
would be no conflict between the General Plan and the Development Code because updates to
the Development Code, as well as adherence to standard conditions related to consistency of
future development with the proposed 2010 General Plan Update and the City's Development
Code, will reduce the potential impacts related to plan consistency to a less than significant
level.
CEQA Review Requirements
The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") generally requires agencies to analyze the
possible environmental impacts of a project prior to approval. Depending on the nature and
extent of the potential impacts, the agency may be required to adopt a Negative Declaration or
Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
Under Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR has been certified or a Negative
Declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless
the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole
record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects;
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 15 of 17
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration
due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been
known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified
as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous
EIR or Negative Declaration;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in
fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of
the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those
analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the
mitigation measure or alternative.
If the none of these conditions calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or Negative
Declaration are met, but minor technical changes or additions are necessary to a previously
adopted environmental document are needed, Section 16164 of the CEQA Guidelines allow the
lead agency to prepare an addendum to the prior environmental document.
A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant should be included
in the addendum, the lead agency's findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The
explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.
The addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the
final EIR or adopted Negative Declaration, and must be considered by the decision-making
body prior to making a decision on the project.
Analysis
This addendum to the ER has been prepared for the Project because none of the conditions
specified in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines requiring the preparation of a subsequent
EIR or Negative Declaration are met.
First, the Project does not propose substantial changes in the City's development regulations
that were not analyzed in the EIR or that will require major revisions of the EIR due to the
involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects.
The Project simply implements the goals and policies adopted in the City's General Plan and
analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The General Plan specifically mentions revising and
updating the Development Code, as shown in the following table.
The Development Code shall be updated to reflect the density LU-2.1, LU-2.2, LU-3.3,
and intensity ranges (especially along Foothill Boulevard) as LU-3.8, LU-4.2, LU-4.3,
specified in the General Plan including updating the LU-4.5, LU-5.1, LU-9.5,
development standards to be consistent with the General Plan ED-2.1, ED-2.4 ED-4.4
provisions. (Table LU-2 of Chapter 2)
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 16 of 17
The Development Code shall be updated to develop guidelines LU-2.4, LU-9.1, LU-9.2,
or standards that will guide infill development and make it LU-9.4, ED-1.4, ED-4.1
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood communities.
The proposed project does not change either the policies or the figures shown in both the EIR
and the General Plan. The project does not change any densities, intensities, land uses, or
designations beyond those analyzed in the EIR. As a result, there is no change in the project
and no new significant environmental effects, or increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects is anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
Second, there have been no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which
the Project is undertaken that will require major revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of
new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects. The EIR, which addressed the impacts of adopting the City's
General Plan and revisions to the Development Code, was adopted on May 10, 2010. The
existing conditions reported in the EIR are very similar to those currently in existence. Since
adoption of the General Plan in 2010, the City has not processed any amendments to the plan.
As a result, there are no substantial changes to the environment which would require a
modification of the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
Third, there is no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not
have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified that
shows (a) the Project will have any significant effects not discussed in the EIR; (b) the
significant effects examined in the EIR will be substantially more severe than previously shown;
(c) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found to be infeasible would now be feasible
and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project; or (d) considerably
different mitigation measures or alternatives than those analyzed in the EIR would substantially
reduce one or more significant effects on the environment are now available.
As the Project is consistent with the General Plan there are no new effects that were not
discussed in the EIR. Similarly, the Project will not result in changes to the impacts identified in
the EIR that could be considered substantially more severe. The Project does not alter any of
the review processes in place for new projects, nor does it exempt new uses in the zoning
ordinance from review. The Project addresses areas of responsibility for development review
and affirms the appropriate body to make recommendations clarifies appeal procedures and
establishes project review timelines. None of these changes will result in physical changes to
the environment inconsistent with the General Plan as analyzed in the EIR. No additional
mitigation measures are necessary.
Summary
In summary, the General Plan EIR sufficiently analyzed the potential impacts associated with
the proposed Development Code Update. The City has a thorough development review
process that is fully documented in the General Plan EIR, and that will remain in place following
the proposed project.
Ordinance No. 863 - Page 17 of 17