The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About641 - OrdinancesITEM REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA To Be Re-advertised and Return at a Future Meeting ORDINANCE NO. 641 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 00-02, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM LOW RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL FOR 1.244 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND HIGHLAND AVENUE AND MAKING TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE DESCRIPTION OF THE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -- APN: 227- 881-01 Am RECITALS. 1. Lewis Retail Centers filed an application for Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 00-02 as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Victoria Community Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On September 27, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on an associated general plan land use amendment and issued Resolution No. 00-104 recommending to the City Council that the associated General Plan Amendment No. 00-02A be approved. 3. On September 27, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and issued Resolution No. 00-105 recommending that the application be approved. 4. On November 1, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 5. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. ORDINANCE. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and ordained by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. ThisCouncilherebyspecificallyfindsthatallofthefactssetforthintheRecitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the above- referenced public hearing on November 1,2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: Ordinance No. 641 ITEM REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA Page 2 of 5 To Be Re-advertised and Return at a Future Meeting a. The application applies to approximately 1.244 acres of land, basically a triangular configuration, located on the northeast comer of Highland Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard and is presently vacant. Said property is currently designated as Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) within the Victoria Community Plan; and b. The properly to the north of the subject site is being developed with a new state freeway. The property to the west is designated Low and is developed with a single-family residential neighborhood. The propertyto the east is designated Village Commercial and is vacant. The propertyto the south is designated Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and is developed with a single family residential neighborhood; and c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development through the land use review process of this application; and d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element by providing additional Convenience Commercial opportunities for the nearby residents and by deleting the potential of residential development from an area of increasing vehicle traffic and noise; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties as evidence by the findings of the environmental assessment. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area by exceeding the minimum lot width of 150' for Commercial sites of the Victoria Community Plan and by being adjacent to existing Village Commercial designated land; and b. Thatthepreposedamendmentwouldnothavesigni~cantimpactsonthe environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the conclusions listed in the Initial Study Parts I and II; and That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan by providing a land use pattern that is complementary with nearby existing Village Commercial parcels. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: ITEM REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA Ordinance No. 641 To Be Re-advertised and Return at a Future Meeting Page 3 of 5 a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. C. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during the public hearing, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby recommends approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 00-02 to change the land use designation to Village Commercial as shown in Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance and to amend the description of the Village Commercial Center on in the first and second paragraphs on pages 67-68 of the Victoria Community Plan shall be amended, as shown in the bolded print below, continuing the planned Neighborhood Commercial development pattern along this portion of Day Creek Boulevard additions to read as follows: "Local commercial needs in the Windrows will be served by a Village commercial center at Highland Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard. Its location on two major arterial roads is convenient to village residents as they enter or leave the community by automobile, and is also accessible to bicycles and pedestrians via the community trail system. Any potential expansion of the Village Commercial land use area should be clearly intended to primarily serve the nearby residents. Expansion of the Village Commercial in this area should not be established to promote 'freeway dependent' commercial activities. The architectural theme that is used for the Village Commercial Center should draw upon the character of the older Victorian homes of the Etiwanda area for inspiration. Village Commercial development should focus on enhancing, and not detracting from the rural Etiwanda character. In this regard, commercial development should be visually non-intrusive to the nearby residential neighborhoods." 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. Ordinance No. 641 ITEM REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA Page 4 of 5 To Be Re-advertised and Return at a Future Meeting PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTEDthis AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: day of ATTEST: William J. Alexander, Mayor Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk I, D EBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia, 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 1't day of November 2000, and was passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 15th day of November 2000. Executed this __ day of , at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk VCPA 00-02 & -03 Zoning Designations Map Ave. ~/kq~;callon Site Zoning OeslgnaUons [ ~D CONTROL I UTIUTY CORRIDOR VERY ~ N no scale ~m