Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 90-166 05/21/1990 resolution No. 90-166 N,C,s, of the City of Petaluma, California DENYING 1991 ALLOCATIONS WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a growth management system by Ordinance 1716 N.C.S. (Chapter 17.26 of the Petaluma Municipal. Code) establishing the procedure for granting or denying allocations on a yearly basis; and WHEREAS, interested developers have filed Notice of Intent to Develop forms in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 17.26 and these, in combination with other allocation obligations created and anticipated by the action of the City Council, comprise the total number of allocation requests for 1991; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds the denial of allocations is not a project pursuant to Section 1578 of California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental action is necessary at this time. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council denies 1991 allocations to those projects as described below: 1. Graylawn Subdivision; Baccala/Hudson for Lucy Webb 2. Pacific Way Subdivision, Mogel Engineering for John Barella 3. Village at Southpoint, Stephens Properties BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council makes the following findings in support of its denying of 1991 allocations: Findings 1. The City Council has considered 1991 Development Objectives as well as other allotment commitments in determining which projects would receive or be denied 1991 allotments. 2. The Graylawn Place Subdivision is exempt from the Residential Growth Management System pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.26.030(H), Exemption, Definitions, Residential Growth Management System Ordinance. 3. The Pacific Way Subdivision 1991 allocation application Notice of Intent to Develop was not complete until Apri12, 1990, one full working day past the deadline for 1991 allocation applications. Reso. 90-166 N.C.S. Res..vo ..............1............... rv.cs. 1 4. The Village at Southpoint proposal is inconsistent with the General Plan land use 2 and zoning of the property. 3 5. Without the North McDowell Road Assessment District in place and roadway 4 improvements associated with the assessment district, there is not reasonable 5 certainty that the existing circulation system can accommodate the Village at 6 Southpoint project proposal as described by the application for 1991 allotments. 7 6. Until an environmental impact report is completed, it is uncertain if the existing and 8 projected public services will be adequate to support the Village at Southpoint 9 proposal. 10 11 12 alldeny/council3 Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City. REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregaing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Approved as to Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) (~~jX~f#~~4~~Special) meeting ~ on the ..-..-21.~ t.-....... day of .....................X11.~?..............................., 19...~Q, by the following vote: •---•-;,.... ----•'---- ---------------- 'ity Attorney AYES: Tencer, Woolsey, Cavanagh, Balshaw, Davis, Vice Mayor Sobel, Mayor Hilligoss .NOES: 0 ABSENT:. 0 ATTEST: ~._....... ' : ! . ...................:......... -. .................. City Clerk Mayor /`. ~. Gbuncil File .................................. CA 10-85 ~ Res. No....9.0r...~(j.(3......... N.C.S.