Resolution Number 86-6-17-3159
RESOLUTION NO. 86-6-17-3
GROWTH MANAGEMENT 86-1 - RESIDENTIAL CONCEPT
PLANS (LACOUAGUE/RIVENDELL)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
RESIDENTIAL CONCEPT PLANS FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT
86-1 (LACOUAGUE/RIVENDELL)
WHEREAS, the applicant, Rivendell Management Group,
Ltd., has submitted Residential Concept Plans for approximately
263± acres that would accommodate 232 residential units on
approximately 98 acres, with the remainder to be used as active
recreation (15.6 acres), public park (4.7 acres), and natural
open space (144.7 acres), located on Assessor's Parcels Nos.
124-223-38 and 124-223-39, in accordance with Chapter 9-7 of the
Municipal Code (Residential Growth Management); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the
concept plan, has recommended adoption of draft growth management
point rating for the concept plan, and has forwarded said plan
and point rating to the City Council recommending approval,
subject to conditions; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council, after holding a duly -noticed
public hearing, hereby finds and determines as follows:
1. The growth management point rating of 61 points is
accurate and appropriate.
2. The proposed concept plan, as conditioned, is
consistent with the 1.1 Very Low Density
Residential and 2.0 General Open Space General
Plan Land Use designation and is otherwise
consistent with all other elements of the General
Plan.
3. The proposed concept plan, as conditioned, is
consistent with the zoning on the property and
with all requirements of Title 9 of the Municipal
Code (Land Use).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a growth
management point rating of 61 points is hereby adopted for the
subject residential concept plan per Chapter 9-7 of the Municipal
Code (said point rating being detailed on attached Exhibit A).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council does
hereby approve Residential Concept Plan Growth Management 86-1,
subject to the following conditions:
-1-
54 1. Pursuant to Section 9-7.109 of the Municipal Code,
Residential Concept Plan approval does not
constitute final approval of a project. All
further requirements of Title 9 of the Municipal
Code must be satisfied for the project to proceed.
2. If the subject parcels are granted building permit
allocations under Chapter 9-7 of the Municipal
Code (Residential Growth Management), the
processing of composite development plans shall be
required. Composite development plans shall
consist of the following: (1) grading, (2)
architectural elevations, (3) landscaping, and (4)
other plans as required by the Director of
Community Planning and Development.
3. Proof of geological and soils stability of all
proposed grading and development within the
subject parcels shall be submitted to the
satisfaction of the City prior to issuance of
permits.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of
June , 1986
KENNETH E. FRIESS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO )
I, MARY ANN HANOVER, City Clerk of the City of San Juan
Capistrano, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a
true and correct copy of Resolution No. 86-6-17-3 , adopted by
the City Council of the City of San Juan Capistrano, California,
at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17th day of
June , 1986 , by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmen Buchheim, Hausdorfer,
and Mayor Friess
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmen Schwa4RYZZ
rtze and Bland
(SEAL) �NHA VC �CRiC
-2-
15"7
/O
Ir
s
9
. bmsaivg 0.15 O
• Measured from nearest boundary of nest distant lot (or dwelling unit if them at
m individual local in the project to the Nearest boundary of the pork ar sdheml
sit:_
`• Examples include: correction of unsafe Condition, mitigation of existing adverse
mvitmnmmntak or aesthetic condition, preservation of historic structures or site.
RATING CRITMIA 1
IWm
.S-1
Less thus
Greater then 1-1.5
1S mi. mi,
mi.
.s mi.
1. proximity of nearest developed public
park or other public recreation facili
(e.g., jr. high or hint schemL)• L
3
S.
2. Proximity of neatest elementary zftr,0 1
3
S
3, project site Located in atteadwce area
ALL 3 levels: 2of 3
1 of 3
He levels
,-
seared by school desigaatad as mar-
avezawMed levels
levels
uvarmouded
i I
crowded (elasentar'y, jr. high, or high
over- .
orer-
school)
` crowded
crowded
0 i 1
3
S
i. project requires extension of eemmnter
I Yu we
or arterial road for access
0 S
s
re,
S. Project provides dual access to
I No - Yes
development
0 S
6. Variances requested to accommodate
I Yo No
pmiect
0 S
T. General plan Ammadment regULTed to
- Yen No
accommodate, project.
.S K
A. Coax= prime of land desipnted for -
' l0ot ----0 0%
Ravenna Consermcimm a Production
in Cho Geontal PIM (b of site area)
0� .�-y to
9. Lawrota'alteraeiat - sensitivity ar-
Relatively heavy 0 Mistgrading-
grding concepts: vidgmume psesm-
1 vredis0 - unmmcesswr preservation
ration - I
laadfemm alteration of major,
lamdtoas
0 > 10
I0. ProvisiM fer open ams - public
Mtn, prevision at—+i Matins• prmmisimm
and pain
area mama of open arra
I
consistent with .
G.P. demignacinm
6 10
s
s:..
�a
u_ Prerials .f privae rseaeetion
M Yen
'
faailitimm
0 ��� 10
IZ. Redmetion of SM or areae betas
no Yr
mentons Ceemrsl !IM density
0 L0
u-ei�
timmgs�ealmOrrAML qMSUtr.
.
Monier. b
. ensu SWANS sommamms.
SON -)
2,5
- IA. cnmmmal public benefit from rte jeM-
70m
0 0100
Provision of few or mederaco Lamas
15"7
/O
Ir
s
9
. bmsaivg 0.15 O
• Measured from nearest boundary of nest distant lot (or dwelling unit if them at
m individual local in the project to the Nearest boundary of the pork ar sdheml
sit:_
`• Examples include: correction of unsafe Condition, mitigation of existing adverse
mvitmnmmntak or aesthetic condition, preservation of historic structures or site.