![]() ![]() On January 24, 1991, the city clerk issued a notice of public hearing to be held on February 20, 1991. The proposed pre-zone permits a maximum of two dwelling units per acre which is within the permitted density range." The General Plan land use designation of low density residential permits a density range of 0-6 dwelling units per acre. The department's report stated, "The proposed change of zone is in conformity with the general plan map and report for the following reason: a). The City's community development department recommended that the City approve the application. The box next to schools was checked "no." ![]() The environmental checklist prepared for the project asked if the proposal would have an effect upon or result in a need for new governmental services. The study "identified potentially significant effects on the environmental " but concluded that "revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects, or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur." The staff recommended adoption of a mitigated negative declaration. The City's staff conducted an initial study of the project under CEQA. The City's planning commission held public hearings on the application on October 23, 1990, after publishing notice of the hearing on October 2, 1990. The application requested changing the zone to R-1-20 (single family residential with a 20,000 square feet minimum lot area). 1 The City designated the proposal Zone Change 90-22. Real party in interest Joseph DeLeo, Jr., is the developer of the property for which the City approved a zone change.ĭeLeo submitted an application to the City for a change of zone for 105.5 acres of land in an area that was then unincorporated. The City has adopted a general plan for local development. ![]() The City is the local governmental entity charged with the planning and zoning of residential, commercial, and industrial development in Corona. The District is the public school district responsible for providing public education and school facilities in Corona and adjacent areas. In its appeal from the judgment, the District repeats its consistency and CEQA challenges. The trial court entered judgment in favor of the City. The trial court concluded the zone change did not violate the requirement of consistency with the General Plan and found the District had failed to exhaust its administrative remedies as to its CEQA claims. The petition challenged the City's approval of a zone change for a residential project on the grounds that: (1) the zone change was inconsistent with the City's general plan (General Plan) and (2) the City had failed to conduct an adequate review of the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Petitioner Corona-Norco Unified School District (District) filed a petition for writ of mandate against the City of Corona and its city council (collectively, City). Saunders for Real Party in Interest and Respondent. Dveirin for Defendants and Respondents.Ĭlayson, Mann, Arend & Yaeger and David R. Mott for Plaintiff and Appellant.īest, Best & Krieger, Barton C. CITY OF CORONA et al., Defendants and Respondents JOSEPH DeLEO, JR., Real Party in Interest and Respondent. CORONA-NORCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |