Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-043 CC Resolution I I I RESOLUTION NO. 05-43 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, Section 65300 of the Government Code requires that cities adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the jurisdiction as well as any adjacent areas which, in the judgment of the City, bears a relationship to its planning; WHEREAS, Sections 65302 of the Government Code requires that a general plan address the following issues: land use, circulation, housing, conservation of natural resources, open space, noise, and public safety; WHEREAS, Sections 65303 of the Government Code allows the City to include any other issues or concerns into the general plan which may relate to the physical development of the City; WHEREAS, the City Council approved the first General Plan, and certified the Environmental Impact Report on November 23,1993; WHEREAS, the City Council has amended the General Plan from time to time and determined that a comprehensive update of all the Element of the General Plan, except the Housing Element, was necessary; WHEREAS, the City Council appointed a community advisory committee to assist in the process of updating the General Plan; WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Committee held meetings on January 7, 2002, January 28, 2002, February 25, 2002, April 01, 2002, May 6, 2002, May 15, 2002, May 30, 2002, April 29, 2003, May 20, 2003, June 11, 2003, March 1, 2004, April 26, 2004, May 3, 2004, and July 6, 2004 to consider the current General Plan and to recommend appropriate changes to the Planning Commission and City Council; WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission held a joint workshop to consider the recommendation of the Community Advisory Committee on August 10, 2004 and provided a number of comments and suggestions on the recommended General Plan; WHEREAS, Section 65302 of the Government Code requires that the City of Temecula submit a copy of its draft Safety Element to the Oivision of Mines and Geology (DMG) for their review and comment; WHEREAS, the City of Temecula submitted its draft Public Safety Element to the DMG on August 26,2004, and WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has made changes to the draft Public Safety Element in response to the concerns raised by DMG; R:/Resos 2005lResos 05-43 I I I WHEREAS, the Community Services Commission met to consider and provide comments on the proposed General Plan on September 13, 2004, at which time members of the public had the opportunity to comment to the Community Services Commission on the proposed General Plan; WHEREAS, the Traffic Safety Commission met to consider and provide comments on the proposed General Plan on September 28, 2004 and January 27, 2005, at which time members of the public had the opportunity to comment to the Traffic Safety Commission on the proposed General Plan; WHEREAS, the City held community meetings on December 26, 2001, January 12, 2002, April 4, 2002, and November 4, 2004 to solicit input, comments, and concerns from members of the community; WHEREAS, Senate Bill 18 amended Section 65352 of the Government Code to require that local governments refer their General Plan to any California Native American tribe with traditional lands located within the City's jurisdiction; WHEREAS, the City of Temecula consulted with representatives of the Pechanga Band of Luiseiio Indians on January 20, 2005; WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has made changes to the draft General Plan as a result of the consultation with the Pechanga Band; WHEREAS, Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code requires that the City of Temecula submit a copy of its draft General Plan to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC); WHEREAS, Section 21675.2 of the Public Utilities Code requires that the ALUC complete its review within 60 days; WHEREAS, the General Plan recognizes the authority of the ALUC around French Valley Airport; WHEREAS, the City of Temecula submitted its draft General Plan to the ALUC on February 4, 2005; WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended (Sections 21000 through 21177 of the Public Resources Code), requires that prior to the approval of any project the Lead Agency consider the potential impacts and effects of said project, consider alternatives to the project, and identify mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate the impact of the project on the environment; WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has prepared and circulated for publiC review and comment an Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines prepared by the Office of Planning and Research; WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21092.5, the City provided its responses to all persons, organizations, and agencies who commented on the Draft EIR on March 22, 2005; R:/Resos 2005lResos 05-43 2 I I I WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held duly noticed public hearings on February 2, 2005 and March 16, 2005 (continued from February 16, 2005) to consider the proposed General Plan and Environmental Impact Report, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters; WHEREAS, the City Council has held duly noticed public hearings on March 22, 2005 and April 12, 2005 to consider the proposed General Plan and Environmental Impact Report, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 05-43 on April 12, 2005 which Certified the EIR, adopted a Statement of Overriding Consideration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the EIR for the General Plan; WHEREAS, it is in the public interest for the City Council to adopt the comprehensive updates of the Land Use, Circulation, Open Space/Conservation, Growth Management/Public Facilities, Public Safety, Noise, Air Quality, Community Design, and Economic Development Elements of the General Plan for the City of Temecula, as amended; WHEREAS, the proposed comprehensive updates of the Land Use, Circulation, Open Space/Conservation, Growth Management/Public Facilities, Public Safety, Noise, Air Quality, Community Design, and Economic Development Elements of the General Plan for the City of Temecula, as amended, are compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community; WHEREAS, the proposed comprehensive updates of the Land Use, Circulation, Open Space/Conservation, Growth Management/Public Facilities, Public Safety, Noise, Air Quality, Community Design, and Economic Development Elements of the General Plan for the City of Temecula, as amended, are internally consistent and comply with all applicable laws; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA: Section 1. The recitals described in the whereas clauses set forth above are true and correct and are hereby adopted as findings by the City Council. Section 2. Council Member Roberts and Council Member Washington did not participate in the public hearing and Council discussion of the North General Kearney Road extension issues. Both own homes in the Meadowview Community and are part of the Meadowview Homeowners Association. The Association owns the property on which the North General Kearney Road extension would be built as well as property surrounding it; therefore the Fair Political Practices Commission has confirmed that Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and Council Member Washington have a conflict due to their home ownership. Based on this conflict of interest, Mayor pro tem Roberts and Council Member Washington each hereby abstain in the approval of this Resolution and certification of the Environmental Impact Report and the approval of the General Plan as such actions relate to the extension of North General Kearney Road. Section 3. Mayor Comerchero and Councilmember Naggar did not participate in the discussion of the Southern Bypass Road nor the land use designation for property located south of the Morgan Hill Specific Plan. Council Member Naggar has a financial interest in approximately 80 acres of real property in adjacent to Anza Rd and EI Chimisal in the R:/Resos 2005lResos 05-43 3 . I I I unincorporated portion of Riverside County and he believes that the implementation of the Southern Bypass and the land use designations for property located south of the Morgan Hill Specific Plan might have a significant effect on the value of this property. Mayor Comerchero also will not be participating in this matter because he is the President of Rancon and Rancon owns approximately 100 acres of property adjacent to Anza Rd and EI Chimisal in the unincorporated portion of Riverside County and he believes that the implementation of the Southern Bypass Road and the land use designation for property located south of the Morgan Hill Specific Plan might have a significant effect on the value of this property. Based on this conflict of interest, Mayor Comerchero and Council Member Naggar each hereby abstain in the approval of this Resolution and certification of the Environmental Impact Report and the approval of the General Plan as such actions relate to the Southern Bypass Road and the land use designation for property located south of the Morgan Hill Specific Plan. Section 4. Council Member Washington did not participate in the discussion concerning Circulation Element Policies 3.6, 3.7, and 3.8 as he owns a home on a street which could be impacted by this policy. Based on this conflict of interest, Council Member Washington hereby abstains in the approval of this Resolution and certification of the Environmental Impact Report and the approval of the General Plan as such actions relate to Circulation Element Policies 3.6, 3.7, and 3.8. Section 5. Council Member Naggar did not participate in the discussion concerning Rainbow Canyon Road, Avenida de Missiones Bridge, and Land Use Map Request NO.7 (72 acres at the north side of Loma Linda) because Horton/Continental, owner of the 20.4 acre parcel being developed at the north east corner of Temecula Land and Loma Linda in the City is a source of income to him and he believes that the changes to the road and bridge and the land use designation might have a significant effect on the value of the property. Based on this conflict of interest, Council Member Naggar herby abstains in the approval of this Resolution and certification of the Environmental Impact Report and the approval of the General Plan as such actions relate to Rainbow Canyon Road, Avenida de Missiones Bridge and Land Use Map Request NO.7. Section 6. Mayor Comerchero did not participate in the discussion of the land use designation for the Callaway Winery property because he is the President of Rancon and Rancon owns approximately 330 acres of property in the unincorporated portion of Riverside County and he believes that the implementation of land use designation for Callaway Winery property might have a significant effect on the value of this property. Based on this conflict of interest, Mayor Comerchero hereby abstains in the approval of this Resolution and certification of the Environmental Impact Report and the approval of the General Plan as such actions relate to the land use designation for Callaway Winery property. Mayor Comerchero also did not participate in the discussion of the land use designation for Land Use Map Request No.2, 72 acres of property at the corner of Nicholas Road and Via Lobo. Although not a technical conflict, the owner of the 72 acres for Land Use Map Request NO.2 at Nicholas Road and Via Lobo will sponsor a major fund raiser for Mayor Comerchero this and he believes it is only appropriate that he not participate on this matter. Based on this conflict of interest, Mayor Comerchero hereby abstains in the approval of this Resolution and certification of the Environmental Impact Report and the approval of the General Plan as such actions relate to Land Use Map Request NO.2. Section 7. In 2003 the City Council changed the General Plan land use designations for the property at the southwest corner Butterfield Stage Road and Pauba Road and off of Via Campanula near Paloma Del Sol Park as well as the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan. In 2003 the R:/Resos 2005/Resos 05-43 4 I I I Corona Family Trust filed a lawsuit against the City over the changes that were made in the General Plan and Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan at this location. At this time, it appears that the City will prevail in the legal challenge. As a result, when these legal proceedings have concluded, the previously approved land use designation changes will be restored to the General Plan without further action of the City Council. These changes are not in conflict with the current General Plan proposal and nothing herein is intended to nor shall anything herein be construed to modify the previously approved General Plan land use designations for this property and in the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan. Section 8. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the comprehensive updates of the Land Use, Circulation, Open Space/Conservation, Growth Management/Public Facilities, Public Safety, Noise, Air Quality, Community Design, and Economic Development Elements of the General Plan for the City of Temecula, as amended, in substantially the form on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Section 8. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12'h day of April, 2005. ~ ATTEST: .' /./ jI Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ~ R:/Resos 2005/Resos 05-43 5 I I I STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 05-43 was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 12'hday of April, 2005, by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Edwards, Naggar, Roberts, Washington, Comerchero NOES: o COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: ABSTAIN: o COUNCILMEMBERS: None o COUNCILMEMBERS: None R:/Resos 2005/Resos 05-43 6