A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (FILE NO. PGPA06-007)

SUBJECT:

A public hearing to conSider a general plan amendment (FILE NO. PGPA06-007) TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR APPROXIMATELY 39 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 612 FEET SOUTH OF MISSION BOULEVARD, NORTH OF PHILLIPS STREET (SPECIFIC TO THE APN’S BELOW), WEST OF MAGNOLIA AVENUE, AND EAST OF BENSON AVENUE (APN NO’S: 1011-421-03, 11, 12, 25, 26, 1011-431, 01, 04, 05, 06, 08, 09, 1011-521-03, 04, 06 THRU 31, AND 1011-591-08)

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving File No. PGPA06-007, and approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration.

COUNCIL GOALS: Focus Resources in Ontario’s Commercial and Residential Neighborhoods · Provide new housing development opportunities to address the City’s regional housing needs

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

BACKGROUND: In May of 2006, AJA Properties/De Oro Properties LLC submitted a General Plan Amendment (GPA) application (File No. PGPA06-007) to change the land use designation from Rural Residential to Low Density Residential in conjunction with a Zone Change (ZC) application (File No. PZC06-003) to change the zoning designation from AR (Agriculture Residential) to RE (Residential Estate). The GPA and ZC would facilitate the subdivision (File No. PMTT06-007) and development (File No. PDEV06-075) of 16 single-family homes, for property located at 1006 South Oaks Avenue.

In 2006, the City hired the Planning Center as the consultant on the City’s General Plan update. In late 2007, the General Plan consultant team began examining existing land use conditions in Ontario and what challenges and opportunities Ontario would need to address. With the applicant’s consent, staff brought forward the GPA and ZC request to the City’s General Plan update consultant to review and comment. The consultant examined the large vacant and underutilized parcels in the area, and found that relatively few properties were used for keeping animals and there was only a fragmented horse trail network within the area. The consultant believed that the GPA and ZC should be expanded to create an area of large estate lots. This expansion would be an opportunity to create estate lots for a segment of the market that is looking for homes on lots between a half acre and the typical quarter acre. In addition, the rezoned area would provide a transition between the commercial and medium density residential uses to the north and the AR properties south of Phillips Street and would also encourage revitalization of the area.

In consideration of the consultant’s recommendation, the boundaries of the GPA and ZC area were redrawn. The new boundary included 187 acres of land generally located south of Mission Boulevard north of Phillips Street, west of Magnolia Avenue to the western city limits (Benson Avenue) as shown on Attachment “A.” After the GPA and ZC boundaries were created, staff held two neighborhood meetings. At the first meeting, held on July 9, 2008, staff informed the property owners of the proposed changes and received their input. At the second meeting, held on August 20, 2008, staff presented alternatives to the rezone boundary areas. A complete list of comments received at both neighborhood meetings is provided as Attachment “B.” On September 3, 2008, the Planning Department mailed a survey to all the property owners within the project area. The purpose of the survey was to obtain an accurate understanding of the support and opposition to the GPA and ZC, including the resident’s interest in keeping large animals.

As a result of the survey and input for the community meetings, the boundaries of the GPA and ZC area were again redrawn. The new boundary area included approximately 39 acres of land, located approximately 612 feet south of Mission Avenue, north of Phillips Street, west of Magnolia Avenue, and east of Benson Avenue (see Attachment “C”). The new area was redrawn in keeping with the consultant’s recommendation.

Prior to the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant submitted a letter to staff requesting to go forward only with the GPA and to continue the ZC, development plan, and tract map. The applicant wanted additional time to review the conditions of approval for the development plan and tract map. Therefore, at the request of the applicant, only the GPA was brought before the Planning Commission to be heard.

On December 22, 2008, the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing on the General Plan Amendment. Thirteen property owners and residents offered testimony both in support of and opposition to the GPA. Attachment “D” is the public testimony minutes from the Planning Commission hearing. Five people spoke in support (3 property owners) of the GPA and expressed the need to encourage development to improve and facilitate the necessary infrastructure improvements that are lacking in the area (curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street widening). Property owners who own the large vacant parcels in the area stated that they have tried in the past to sell their properties to developers. These property owners testified that the development of 18,000 sq. ft. lots would not be cost effective in the area and, their properties remain undeveloped.

Seven people (5 property owners) spoke in opposition of the GPA and wanted the area to remain AR. They believed that AR zoned properties would be more valuable because of the ability to keep large animals. They also believed that the creation of smaller 10,000 square foot lots would increase the density in area, resulting in increased traffic and, therefore, further eroding property values in the area. In addition, they believed that future residents in the RE zone area would complain about the animal keeping, and further erode the ability to maintain large animals in the AR zone.

One property owner opposed the GPA because his property was not included in the rezone area. The property owner testified that he was strongly in favor of the GPA, and felt that the mailed survey did not accurately reflect the true number of property owners in support of the GPA. He explained that he had talked to eight additional residents who were in favor the GPA.

At the meeting of December 22, 2008, the Planning Commission voted 6-0, with Chairman Lizarraga recusing himself, to recommend that the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration. In addition, the Planning Commission expressed the importance of neighborhood identity, character and animal keeping to those residents within the subject area and surrounding areas. As part of the recommendation to the City Council, Planning Commission directed staff to draft an ordinance to create an “Overlay District” within the area to allow the keeping of large and medium animals pursuant to the Development Code provisions for animal keeping in the newly created RE zoned area. If the GPA is approved by the City Council, staff would bring forward an ordinance to the City Council for creation of the “Overlay District” as well as a resolution rezoning the GPA area to RE.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The application is a project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) ("CEQA") and an initial study has been prepared to determine possible environmental impacts. On the basis of the initial study, which indicated that all potential environmental impacts from the Project were less than significant or could be mitigated to a level of insignificance, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Ontario Local CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, to ensure that the mitigation measures are implemented, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared for the Project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15097, which specifies responsible agencies/departments, monitoring frequency, timing and method of verification and possible sanctions for non-compliance with mitigation measures. All environmental documentation is on file with the Planning Department and is available for review.

APPLICANT: AJA Properties/De Oro Properties LLC. Members of the LLC are Alex Espinoza and Jimmy Espinoza.

STAFF MEMBER PRESENTING: Jerry L. Blum, Planning Director