Laserfiche WebLink
10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />Colton City Council Resolution No. R-29-21 <br />May 4, 2021 <br />Page 2 <br />Application that addresses the comments and concerns expressed during the appeal hearing directly <br />to the Development Services Director for review and recommendation as a revised sub -application <br />(with no application fee required); and <br />WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial <br />Study had been prepared to assess environmental impacts for the proposed project and such <br />assessment will be re-evaluated in accordance with the requirements of CEQA upon re -submittal <br />of the revised Application; and <br />WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY <br />OF COLTON: <br />SECTION 1. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein <br />by reference. <br />SECTION 2. Based on the entire record and all written and oral evidence presented, <br />including the staff report, the City Council hereby upholds the appeal, in part, and denies the current <br />version of Tentative Tract Map No. 18233 for failure to meet the required findings detailed below. <br />Pursuant to CMC section 16.76.010, a Tentative Map shall be denied if the City fails to "make any <br />of the [enumerated] findings." (emphasis added.) The City Council denies Tentative Tract Map <br />No. 18233 for its failure to meet the required findings necessary under CMC 16.76.010(A), <br />16.76.010(B), and 16.76.010(C), as detailed below. <br />A. The proposed subdivision and the provisions for its design and improvement <br />are inconsistent with the General Plan for the City of Colton ("General <br />Plan"). Specifically, Tentative Tract Map No. 18233 ("TTM 18233") is <br />incompatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses of the General <br />Plan, as evidenced below. <br />1. General Plan Policy, LU 1-8: Interpret the Land Use Plan in a manner that <br />provides for compatibility between adjacent land uses, and that allows the City to <br />achieve land use, design, and economic development objectives. <br />The proposed subdivision and hillside development permit are incompatible with <br />surrounding land uses. Specifically, the subdivision proposes lots and street patterns <br />that are inconsistent and incompatible with the surrounding uses and existing <br />residential development within the applicable R-1 Zone. The proposed project <br />would not compatible or in character with the size, design and scale of surrounding <br />properties. <br />B The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with <br />the General Plan. <br />-2- <br />