Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-17 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 08-17 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2007-00871, A REQUEST TO REDUCE THE LOT AREA AVERAGE REQUIREMENT FOR AN APPROVED 56-LOT SUBDIVISION (SUBTT17651) FROM 25,000 SQUARE FEET TO 24,985 SQUARE FEET IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A PUBLIC STREET FOR A SITE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BANYAN STREET AND EAST OF EAST AVENUE -APN: 0225-191-12. A. Recitals. 1. MDS Consulting for Tava Development filed an application for the approval of variance DRC2007-00871, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of May 2008, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing May14, 2008, including written and oral staff reports,together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a vacant site that is surrounded by undeveloped land to the north (across Banyan Street) south and east and by a combination of vacant land, a Christmas tree farm and existing residences to the west; and b. The parcel has sparse vegetation and mature Eucalyptus trees and drains roughly from north to south; and c. The original 56-lot subdivision(SUBTT17651)was approved on August 9, 2006. The Resolution of Approval included an Engineering Department condition which stated that the applicant must make a "good-faith-effort" to obtain land from the neighboring property owners in order to construct a public street. The applicant made an offer to purchase the land in question from the neighboring property owners and the offer was declined. The applicant redesigned the project to have the street right-of-way encroach on a portion of two of the newly subdivided lots. This change reduced the overall lot area average by 15 square feet, which brought the project below the required 25,000 square foot lot average and necessitated this variance request; and d. Upon submittal to the City, staff required that the applicant have a licensed real estate appraiser evaluate the "fair-market'value of the land in question to verify that the applicant PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-17 DRC2007-00871 — MDS CONSULTING FOR TAVA DEVELOPMENT May 14, 2008 Page 2 had made a"good-faith"offer. First American Commercial Real Estate services, Inc. appraised the land on March 6, 2008,for an amount higher than the original offer. The applicant made a new offer for the property at the appraised value and the property owners again declined the offer; and e. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the required 25,000 square foot lot area average requirement by 15 square feet to 24,985 square feet in order to construct a public street. The lots will continue to meet all other City development standards. The change in the street alignment will affect the width of Lots 22 and 23 of the approved Tentative Tract Map, though both lots will continue to meet City development standards. Staff believes the requested deviation from the City's lot area average requirement, at less than 1 percent below the 25,000 square foot requirement, is so minimal that it continues to meet the intent of the development district in which the site is located. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above referenced public hearing, and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. In that, the objective of the 25,000 square foot average lot area requirement is to create low density residential area with lots that are of a size and proportion suitable for keeping horses. Each of the proposed lots exceeds the City's requirements for keeping horses. Without a reduction in the lot area requirement, the applicant would have to reduce the total number of lots, which would place a physical hardship on the applicant that would be inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. In that, the site is bordered by an existing residential development which dictates the alignment of the public street that accesses the site and necessitates that the street jog over a portion of two the applicant's lots, reducing the lot area average by 15 square feet. C. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. In that,without the variance the applicant would be required to redesign the 41-acre 56 lot subdivision in order to increase the average lot area by 15 square feet, a negligible amount considering the size and scope of the development. d. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. In that, the proposed lots will exceed the minimum depth and width and lot area requirements of the Very Low Residential District. e. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. In that, the newly created lots will be indistinguishable from the other lots in the same development district other than being on average 15 square feet smaller in size than the 25,000 square foot lot average requirement. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-17 DRC2007-00871 — MDS CONSULTING FOR TAVA DEVELOPMENT May 14, 2008 Page 3 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included forthe environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration in August 9, 2006, in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTT17651. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii)substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or(iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with the variance, that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. In that, the applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the City's 25,000 square foot lot area average requirement for the subject zoning area by 15 square feet in order to construct a public street. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less-than-significant. In that,the variance will not change the size or scope of the project and will only effect the alignment of a public street. C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record,the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of the variance. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) All the Standard Conditions and Special Conditions included with the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17651 remain in effect. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-17 DRC2007-00871 — MDS CONSULTING FOR TAVA DEVELOPMENT May 14, 2008 Page 4 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF MAY 2008. PLANNING C MM ON OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY:- /6'11 Y: / ! �C Pam ta4rt, Chairman ATTEST: Jam I R. Troyer, AICP, Secret6ry I, James R. Troyer,AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of May 2008, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE �= COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT { DEPARTMENT T STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: DRC2007-00871 SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: MDS CONSULTING FOR TAVA DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: APN: 0225-191-12 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents,officers,or employees, because of the issuance of such approval,or in the alternative,to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may,at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 08-17, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Notice of Exemption - $50 X b) Notice of Determination - $50 c) Mitigated Negative Declaration - $ 1,926.75 d) Environmental Impact Report - $2,656.75 SC-1-05 1 11PLANNINGTINAL\PLNGCOMM12008 Res&Stf rep\DRC2007-00871 StdCond 5-14.doc Project No. DRC2007-00871 Completion Date B. Time Limits 1. Variance approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans,architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department,the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon,all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 3. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision,or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 5. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 6. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. 7. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for Planning Director and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements,special street posting, phone listing for community concerns,hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 2 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2008 Res&Stf rep\DRC2007-00871StdCond 5-14.doc