Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004/06/15 - Agenda Packet - Spec Jt w/Plng Com AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL JOINT MEETING Tuesday, June t5, 2004 + 5:30 p.m. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall + Tri-Communities Room 10500 Civic Center Drive + Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730-3801 A. CALL TO ORDER 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call: Alexander , Gutierrez , Howdyshell , Kurth , Williams Fletcher , Macias , McNeil , McPhail , Stewart B. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council and Planning Commission. State law prohibits the Council and Commission form addressing any issue not previously included on the agenda. The Council and Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual. C. ITEM(S) OFBUSINESS 1. DISCUSSION OF HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT D. ADJOURNMENT I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 10, 2004, per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. EXCERPT FROM APRIL 28, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES J. LEWIS HOMES PRESENTATION ON TERRA VISTA UPDATE AND FUTURE PROJECTS Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated staff has been working with the Lewis Company on several applications they recently filed. He said when they began to discuss two currer~t applications, he felt it would be important to give Lewis a chance to talk about the status of Terra Vista and to talk about why they are venturing outside the confines of Terra Vista. He stated he would then like to conclude with some policy questions because their requests are similar to a lot of requests the Planning Department is currently getting. He observed there seems to be a very strong housing market in Southem California and Planning is receiving questions about General Plan Amendments and zone changes on a weekly basis throughout the City. He indicated that after the Lewis presentation, he would show other sites where developers have approached the City to discuss potential zone changes. David Lewis, Lewis Companies, stated he was accompanied by Randall Lewis; Mark Bertone and Aaron Steers from Madole and Associates; and Melanie Smith from the Windrows Partners, who worked in the background for the Planning Center on the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan in 2001. He said he wanted to cover two topics: activity in Terra Vista and Haven Oasis, which is their vision of the former La Mancha Golf Course site. He noted the golf course has been vacant for a long period of time and the site has been used for dumping and the trees on site are diseased. He commented it is a good location, located near City Hall. He indicated they believe it has good residential characteristics and the Haven Avenue frontage has good office characteristics. He noted the site is currently designated Industrial Park in Subarea 6 and part of the site is in the Haven Avenue Overlay District., which goes from Foothill Boulevard south to approximately 4th Street, and is designed to stimulate higher intensity office users and what the General Plan describes as prestige office users. He stated they propose preserving the Haven Overlay, but they propose a change in land use designation from Industrial Park on the westerly portion of the site to Low Medium Residential. He showed slides of the type of homes they propose. He acknowledged they are not in the home building business, so they have teamed up with William Lyon Homes. He stated they provided packages listing a variety of communities in Rancho Cucamonga that William Lyon Homes developed. He said they envisioned a gated residential component similar to homes on the west side of Center Avenue. He indicated there would be a homeowners' association to maintain the open space and streets within the gates. He showed a proposed site plan with connected green spaces and an alley loaded concept for a portion of the single-family, detached houses. He noted the alley-loaded houses would have front doors lining a grass coudyard. He said they plan for greenbelt linkages and showed a preliminary sketch of proposed recreational amenities. He showed a master plan for the site and adjoining propedies from Humbolt Avenue to Civic Center Drive. On the Oasis Master Plan, he showed residential properties to the west with Haven Avenue Overlay uses along Haven Avenue including a master plan for offices along Haven Avenue for the neighboring properties. He believed the General Plan Advisory Committee envisioned corporate offices along Haven Avenue but he thought a residential component would respond to the housing demand and fit better with the existing neighborhood than either light industrial or office. He said the proposed Oasis residential component is surrounded by Low and Low Medium housing to the south, Medium and Medium High to the west and north. Mr. Lewis noted that slightly over 400 apartment units are planned on the Burnett project with a series of apartments and condominiums to the south. He said ththeir proposal to Low Mediumwould reconcile to surrounding uses. He felt there is a defined pattern of residential along the westerly portion off Haven Avenue. He said one of the concerns they heard about the condominiums that were built in the mid 1980s along Civic Center Drive was that the remaining land to the east along Haven Avenue is too shallow for significant office users. He believed the Oasis plan allows enough land to fit any office building currently in the Ontado Center or along the 1-10 Freeway in the Ontario corridor, which includes some six-story buildings. He said an approximate 17-acre site will accommodate any of those types of users. He showed various housing types that they propose from 1,900-2,400 square feet. He felt it would appeal to young professionals looking for a lower maintenance lifestyle. He said the alley-loaded concept is prevalent in Ladera Ranch, I~ioe, and Valencia and also exists in the Windsor community in Terra Vista. He showed elevations of proposed more conventional single-family detached homes similar to what Lyon Homes is building in Glendora and on the Tustin Airbase in Ladera Ranch. He believed it was in the style and level of architecture expected in Rancho Cucamonga. He indicated they included the two-pack concept with one garage set back and a neighboring garage set forward. He said they spent a fair amount of time studying having the site integrated with the office and residential areas working together but determined the office component could be better marketed if thera is a buffering between the two uses. He thought the office users would want the office buildings aligned along Haven Avenue with a parking field in the back and he thought the parking field would be a nice buffer from residential uses to the west. He suggested there would then be a line of parking and a recreational component on the inside of the gated residential portion to further expand the buffering araa. He believed the Oasis project would stimulate growth along Haven Avenue and make the area more appealing for office users. He said they propose their full parkway and a high architectural wall with a gated component. He noted they were working with staff and planned to have a neighborhood meeting most likely in the second week of May. He felt Oasis would enhance the neighborhood with their proposed home sizes being large relative to surrounding home sizes and their extensive amenity package and the residential component would stimulate office development. Mr. Lewis then gave a brief overview of Terra Vista. He said Home Depot has been very successful at that location and wants to expand their store by approximately 60,000 square feet. He indicated that Home Depot has expanded stores to the larger size in only three I:ilaces so far but they feel the demand is hera and thera are terrific incomes and demographics. He indicated they are also exploring the relocation of Walmart from Foothill Marketplace to the west of Home Depot, which would mean almost 400,000 square feet between the two stores. He said they have discussed the matter with staff and they are looking at implementing a residential component that makes sense near this type of retail use. He remarked thera are a variety of commercial pad users along Foothill Boulevard including Banner Mattress and Washington Mutual and there are a variety of restaurant' users going further west. He said they are trying to determine how close the residential area should be brought to Foothill Boulevard. He noted that Victoria Gardens Mall is scheduled to open in October and it has also created a new synergy around it that has changed the demand characteristics for Foothill Boulevard frontage. He thought the City had been approached by other developers with plans to reduce the commercial land along Foothill Boulevard and redesignate portions as residential. He said that redesignation process is part of an overall process being seen in a lot of places in Southern California that reflects smart growth that takes advantage of the fortitude of corridors like Foothill Boulevard that can handle a lot of traffic. He noted that the opening of the 210 Freeway has drawn a lot of traffic from Foothill Boulevard and therefore developers are exploring the option of residential in lieu of formerly designated commercial. He noted that redesignations are occurring mostly in the westem end of the City. He thought there might be a sensible way to bdng residential uses to Foothill Boulevard in those areas where thera is not as much commemial viability. He indicated they would not want to preclude having upscale restaurants or a bank locate on Foothill Boulevard, but felt thera will be excess space along Foothill Boulevard. He said they have been approached by restaurateurs near Milliken Avenue. He stated they envision some form of housing north of the Terra Vista Commons and the area has always been designated in the Terra Vista Community Plan to have approximately 175 homes. He noted there is a high density residential area north of Target and they envision apartments at 24-32 units per acre in approximately 2-3 years. He said they anticipate the development there would be highly innovative with an urban feel. He pointed out the location of the Homecoming apartment homes with its 1,400 square foot clubhouse and felt that will be an exciting project. He noted there is one last portion of Medium High and High Residential property between Brighton Town Homes and -2- Homecoming and they envision that will be a housing project averaging in the Iow 20 dwelling units per acre. He said that Terra Vista was originally approved for 9,200 dwelling units and they now figure it will be between 8,700-9,200 units, but most likely around 9,000. He felt they have addressed some of the school and park issues. He noted they reviewed the parks in Terra Vista and that summary was presented to the Commission in 2003, which he believed concluded they have adequately provided for parks. He said they are studying the matter with the School Districts to be sure there are adequate schools for the area that does not stress the community parks. Mr. Buller said he felt it was important to have a workshop with the Commission because there are bigger policy questions as to what the City wants to do with the numerous requests for changes coming forward. He indicated the predominance of requests for changes to the General Plan have to do with providing additional housing. He provided a map showing 28 vadous locations where the City has been approached to change zoning to residential from various uses including General Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, General Industrial, Industrial Park, Office, Open Space, Utility Corridor, and Mixed Use. He indicated there have been suggestions to use Foothill Marketplace for some creative adaptive reuse for housing because many large tenants have moved and the City suspects the center will go through some transition. He noted that when the City amended the General Plan in 2001 Mixed Use designation was added and locations throughout the City identified. He said the City has always believed that when the regional mall opens, there may be too much commercial there to sustain all the commercial along Foothill Boulevard; therefore, many of the mixed use ideas were along Foothill Boule~,ard. He stated it was believed adding rooftops along Foothill Boulevard would add a synergy into the success of some of the commercial centers there. He observed th.at every time commercial or industrial land is redesignated as residential, the City loses potential job sites from the City composition. He said it is true that another commercial site may be intensified to recapture some of the lost jobs, but it is a policy issue. He asked for direction from the Planning Commission as to whether the City wants to begin opening up the General Plan to determine where and how many more houses we want in the City and where and what kind they should be. He said he suggested Lewis may want to look at parcels in Terra Vista that are already zoned for residential before rezoning other types of land. He indicated policy issues include the balance of land use in the City and the need for more housing. He said that staff acknowledges that Southern California needs more housing. Chairman Macias stated that SCAG is always looking for someone to pick up additional residential. Commissioner Stewart stated there are a lot of complex issues. She noted there are almost 30 places where there have been requests to amend the zoning. She felt the City needs to take a real hard-core look at those areas specifically. She said they should be looked at on a case-by-case basis. She asked at what point should the City begin to say there is only so much availability and there should be no more rezoning from commercial to residential. She indicated she looked at areas where the City is already giving up commercial and noted redesignations have already taken place along Foothill Boulevard, Milliken Avenue and 4th Street, and the General Dynamics site. She wondered where the point is that the City takes a strong stand that properties remain office or commercial until some future time when the City begins to see what synergy there will be based on the mall and the other things happening in the City. With respect to the Oasis project, she asked the size of the proposed residential lots. Mr. Lewis responded they are 42 x 70 feet and 45 x 90 feet. Mr. Buller indicated they are 40 x 70 feet and 40 x 80 feet on the plans. Mr. Lewis thought the larger ones are 40 x 90 feet. Mr. Buller stated the plans call them out as 40 x 90 feet, but they scale to 40 x 80 feet. -3- Commissioner Stewart remarked she has listened to the Oasis presentation twice and there was new material before the Commission this evening. She said she could not make a decision on that proposal this evening. She wanted to see economic studies outlining the benefits. She noted that one of Mr. Lewis' opening statements was that the parcel is located by City Hall and she felt that should make it all the more valuable for office product in the future. She was concerned about the lot sizes and thought what they were proposing may not be the best product. She suggested that if residential product is to go there, perhaps it should be live/work or condominium or apartments above an office product. She said she was not really anxious to move forward with the present proposal. She thought that parcel should be discussed by the full Commission and the City Council at a workshop. She felt it was good to expand Home Depot and bring Walmart to the Home Depot center but she acknowledged it would make another problem for the Foothill Marketplace. Commissioner Fletcher stated there are more residential or proposed residential projects than he was aware of. He said the name Oasis implies a special place in a wasteland, and he did not think it is a wasteland. He stated he has an open mind about it. He indicated when he first looked at it, he thought the residential portion was transitioned well with the rest of the residential in the area but he is not certain it is the particular product. He recalled that Randall Lewis gave a presentation to the Commission, at which he said the future would have more high density residential. He said this particular project had references to Ladera Ranch. He observed the Commissioners toured Ladera Ranch and said there were some things in the development he liked and others that he did not like. He said he really liked the live/work home-base business concept with a frontage street with ADA accessible professional offices in front of living quarters. He believed those in Ladera Ranch were 3,400-3,500 square feet at $850,000 and their 29 units were sold out. However, he thought their situation was different wherein they took a chunk of land out in the County and worked from scratch. Mr. Fletcher said he did not like the alley loading in Ladera Ranch because it was too tight. He noted the Commissioners observed a garbage truck having to back down the alley to pick up the trash and he feared there might be conflicts with children in the area. He thought high density residential within a mixed use project may be a good use along Foothill Boulevard. He believed high density projects should allow people to walk to restaurants or retail within a few blocks of their homes and he noted that would not be the case at the Oasis location. He thought a 1,900-2,400 square foot product sounds like it may be affordable and he observed that children of City residents have to buy outside of the City because they cannot afford anything within the City. He felt the City needs some affordable units for younger families. He was concerned about replacing the office area along Haven Avenue and noted it was always planned to be a sophisticated, upscale office corridor. He stated there are more residential projects coming into the City and he hated to give up office space where people could Five and work in the community so people don't have to commute. With respect to office product along Haven Avenue, he was not sure that the project on the southwest comer of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard was the dght project to put there when looking in hindsight. He observed there have been problems with marketing the property east of the apartments north of the proposed Oasis project. Mr. Lewis thought it was staff's perception that it is a difficult site for office use because of its depth but said they feel it would be sufficient for the types of offices that are currently being approved along the Haven corridor. He did not feel the landowner is interested in selling it. Mr. Fletcher asked the size of the building on the rendering shown by Lewis. Mr. Lewis indicated there are offices being approved from 5,000-15,000 square feet. He said there is a 5,000 square foot medical condominium being constructed across the street from the Oasis property. He thought the property north of them could accommodate up to a 15,000 square foot project. Commissioner Fletcher said he was intrigued with the residential aspect but the density proposed was not what he had envisioned. He felt the City needs office condominiums and he believed there is a big demand for them. He observed office condominiums give Rancho Cucamonga residents an opportunity to own the site of their business within the City. Chairman Macias said he would reserve judgment regarding the Oasis project. He indicated he was not ovedy excited about the layout as it stands and he is not convinced it is the best land use but he would leave the door open to see where it goes. He commented he lives in the middle of Terra Vista and it has turned out exceptionally well. He said he has been there 15 years and they are extremely happy and comfortable there. He thought the trail system is magnificent because you can get to every park and the trails are heavily used. He remarked he was on the General Plan Task Force and he thought they did a good job of looking at what the future holds and what can be expected. He said he was somewhat perplexed and mildly concerned that things have changed since the Plan was adopted in 2002. He recognized that times have changed and the economy has changed but he was surprised about all the inquiries staff has received for land use changes and the demand for housing. He thought the City needs to determine what this means for the City in the long run and the City needs to determine if it is necessary to re-look at the General Plan and the demand for housing. He wondered if the Citywould then be looking at another issue in three years. He was reluctant to make changes to the General Plan. He said that if the City does look at those issues again, he proposed that there should be a socioeconomic focus on the costs to the City in the long term if residential units in the City are increased. He asked the cost benefit. He questioned the long-term effect of reducing commercial and adding residential. He said in his mind, the General Plan was reviewed with a vision in an attempt to balance jobs and housing. He thought this may be a step backwards. He was not sure if that balance is appropriate or inappropriate but he thought that if the City looks at additional residential units, the City needs to clearly understand what it is getting into and what roll it will play in the region as a whole. He preferred to try to maintain a decent jobs and housing balance or the City will otherwise be destined to be Los Angeles Count, s housing market and he was concerned about that. He said he realized there is a political reality and there are desires to change things but he thought it is important to look at the bigger picture and the whole cost of things in the long run before making adjustments. Randall Lewis thought that redeveloping Terra Vista will be years away and he asked what kinds of housing the Commission thought would be appropriate on the last parcels there. He thought they would be for sale units that are more urban and he thought some mixed use. He believed they are down to about their last five projects. He asked if the Commissioners had seen examples in other communities of things they would like to see. Commissioner Fletcher said there were some aspects about Ladera Ranch that he liked, but he noted they started with a clean slate. He said that if density is increased, he would like to see the projects in a mixed use setting that is pedestrian friendly so residents won't have to get into their cars to go to a regional center. He said that was why there might be opportunity along Foothill Boulevard. With respect to the Oasis project, he thought the developer may wish to build the residential first and the office later, but he felt it would be best to build the office product first or at least concurrently with any residential so there would not be a request to abandon the office portion in the future. He said he talked to a friend who owns an accounting firm who wants to buy a building with approximately 30,000 to 60,000 square feet. He indicated his friend wanted to locate along Haven Avenue but is now looking In Ontario because there was nothing available. He did not want to lose the land we have available for'upscale offices. Commissioner Stewart felt more senior housing is needed. She concurred that office condominiums are needed. She agreed the City should step back and look at the long picture and the economics of the proposed zoning changes. She said the General Plan was done in 2001 and noted that most communities only revise their General Plan every 10 years. She noted there were a number of people on the Task Force and she could not imagine that the group was so far off that there are now almost 30 projects that need rezoning. She observed that everyone is in it for profit and fe~t the City -5- should not do something today that will hurt the City 10 years from now. She believed the City needs to look at the really big picture. Chairman Macias said he liked the comment regarding the senior housing. He said he would like to see a vested interest. He concurred with what Commissioner Fletcher said regarding Foothill Boulevard. He was concerned about the magnitude of apartment complexes that have been built and said that the schools have taken a beating. He thought there should be lower densities in Terra Vista. Randall Lewis asked if Chairman Macias was looking for lower density or a lower child count. Chairman Macias thought it should be lower density in general. Mr. Buller said it would take some time for staff and the Lewis team to absorb what had been said in the meeting. He agreed it may be a good idea to have a workshop with the City Council. He said staff had discussed an idea with the Lewis team to have them perhaps tier off the fiscal report that was done for the last General Plan and look at the benefit analysis for the City. He said that is one of the components that might come back with the evaluation of the applications submitted. Randall Lewis stated that he walked the Terra Vista trail underneath the Milliken Route the previous Saturday for the first time. He asked Chairman Macias for his thoughts on ideas for the trail and what could be done to make it better. Chairman Macias stated that landscaping needs help throughout the entire trail system. He thought there should be a connection to Central Park. He felt the lighting is well done and the trails are wide enough for a good amount of traffic. He believed the landscaping is well done but thought it would be good to look at the placement of trees and some of the landscaping because there are a couple of areas where the landscaping is a little too dense and people may feel unsafe at night. He felt the trails are faidy well connected and it is easy to get to every park within a reasonable walking distance. Randall Lewis suggested that Mr. Buller walk the trails with him. Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, stated he is the Trails Coordinator for the City. He said they get comments that from others that trail signage is minimal and people on the trail system do not know where they are or where they can go. He noted he said he had seen the plans for the Pacific Electdc Trail System and he thought the signs were very interesting. He explained the intersections have arrows in a nice rock column to indicate what is located in each direction. He thought that it is important for trail users and also from a safety standpoint. Randall Lewis suggested they could be fun signs. Mr. Buller said he would be glad to take a walk. ¢ Chairman Macias indicated he would like to go along on t'he walk. Mr. Buller said he would have staff proceed with reviewing the applications and working with the applicant. -6- Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.030 Table 17.30.030 - Use Regulations for Industrial Districts SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE BY SUBAREA USE TYPES USE Custom Light Modium Heavy Minimum Impact Heavy ~dministrative & Office Professional/Design Services =teseanYn Services NHOLESAL.E, STORAGE, & =ublic Storage Jght Vledium -leavy ;ATERIAL~ RECOVERY FACILITIES Collection Facilities Processing Facilities Scrap Operation Administrative Civic Services Convention Centers Cultural Day Care Facility Emergency Shelter Extensive Impact Utility Facilities Flood Control/Utility Corridor Public Assembly Public Safety & Utility Services Religious Assembly Schools  P - Permitted Use C - Conditionally Permitted Use [] - Non-Marked Uses not permitted MI/HI - Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial A 4 Adult Entertainment Zoning Permit Required HI * Heavy Industrial MU/OS - Mixed Use/Open Space P* * Permitted wilh Master Plan approval for 35 acre minimum 17.30-7 __ 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.030 Table 17.30.030 Continued - Use Reg for Industrial Districts ~,dultEntertainment A AlIA A A A A A ^IA ~,gdculturai/Nursery Supplies & Services P P P P ~ P P P P ~imaICare nC C C C C C C C ~,utomotive Fleet Storage { ~C C C · C P C C P Automotive Fueling Services~ C !Automotive P P P ~P P P P P P Automotive/LightRentaITruck Repair- Minor P P P P P Automotive/Tmck Repair- Major P C p p Automotive Sales and Leasing ~ C C~ C Automotive Service Court P P- P 'P C Automotive Service Station ~'C C C C 'C C,'C C C C C lC Building Contractor's Office&Yards J P P P P P P P P P P P Building Contractor's Storage Yard p P :..--O · . P P P P Building Maintenance Services P Building& Light Equipment Supplies&Sales P C P C C P P C P C C P Susiness Supply Retail & Services ~ P*'P P P P P" P P P P P !P P '~/~ Businees Support Services P*) P C P P C P F Communication Services p ,p p p p p p Convenience Sales&Services ( C*~ C C P P ~C C C C C C Entertainment C C -'xtansive Impact Commemial C C C C Fast Food Sales ( C' C C C 1 C C C C :::3 Insurance & Real Estate Services ( p p p p P P'~P C P C C P P 'O Financial, Food & Beverage Sales~ C* C C C C C~Ci C C C I.- Funeral & Crematory Services C C Heavy Equipment Sales&Rentals C C C C C P C C C C P Hotel/Motel p p p' P C ~ndoor Wholesale/Retail Commemial (~ . LC C C C C C C Laundry Services{' P P P (P P P P P M~-Ii~-~l/Health Care Services ( P P P P P P ~P. P P P P ' ! p PemonalServices C*' C p p p p.ip; C P P P Petroleum Products Storage ~ C C I C C C C Recreation FacilitiesI C C C C;C C C [P C C P P P Repair Services P P C p p ~P P P P P P C Restaurants pIIP P P P · P P P Restaurants with Bar or Entertainment C I C C~ ~C C ) C C Specialty Building Supplies & Home Improvement P P C Warehouse-Style Retail Merchandising ** ~' -.~ ~ C 3~IOTE ' ' IE - p Permitted Use  C Conditionally. Permitted Use [] Non-Marked uses not permitted MI/HI - Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial A Adult Entertainment Zoning Permit Required HI - Heavy Industrial MU/OS Mixed Use/Open Space - Ancilla~ uses limited to 20 percent of the P* Permitted with Master Plan app"oval for 35 floor area per Section 17.30.080.5.b. acres minimum · * - Refer to Subarea 12 Special Considerations for addition~al restrictions 17,30-8 __ 11/00 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 FIGURE 17.30.080-A FOOTH HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT Urban Center CIRCULATION BE' er lees R.O.W. RAIL SERVICE TRAILS/ROUTES SF RR eeae Bicycle ~ Special Stri~etecaPe/ ...... Power Line/ Utility Easement --- Creeks & Charmels ~ Bridge 17.30-51 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 A. Haven Avenue Overlay District. 1. Purpose. The purpose of the Overlay District is to establish development standards, which address the unique setting and character of the Haven Avenue Corridor. The Haven Avenue Overlay District is located on both the east and west sides of Haven Avenue extending from Foothill Boulevard south to 4th Street, as shown in Figure 17.30.080-A. 2. Applicability. The Haven Avenue Overlay District is to be applied in conjunction with S~bareas 6 and 7 and provides more specific and/or restrictive development policies, · design standards, and land use regulations for both Subareas. Topics not specifically covered by the Haven Avenue Overlay District will continue to be governed by the regulations of the Industrial Districts. Development adjacent to the Haven Avenue Overlay District shall consider compatibility and integration with the Overlay District through the Master Plan process. 3. Settin,q. Haven Avenue is located near the geographic center of the City and will be the most significant gateway into Rancho Cucamonga. Another important aspect is the distinctiveness of the Haven Avenue Corridor in relation to other major arterials designated as "Special Boulevards." Haven Avenue is the major travel route for the City and has the potential for high-end office development with a unique combination of direct access to the airport and the Interstate 10 Freeway. This provides the City a rare opportunity to enhance its image by encouraging intensive, high-quality office and professional development along the Haven Avenue Corridor. 4. Relation to Genera~ Plan. The General Plan affirms that travel routes are predominate elements of the community's image and encourages the distinctiveness of individual districts and roadway corridors. In addition, the General Plan states that a consistent design theme is necessary to reinforce the image or perception of a route. The Haven Avenue Corridor and the Industrial Park category should be designed to project a "campus like image for firms seeking an attractive and pleasant working environment with high prestige value." a. Goal Statement. Goals ara statements that define the community's aspiration and intentions. The goal for the Haven Avenue Corridor has evolved from sessions with the industrial and business communities and the City's elected and appointed officials. This goal represents the current conception of and future aspirations for the best interest of the City for the Haven Avenue Corridor. The Haven Avenue Corridor goal is to: Encourage long-range master planned development along the Haven Avenue Corridor which enhances Rancho Cucamonga's image by providing an intensive, high-quality gateway into the City and by promoting a distinctive, attractive, and pleasant office park atmosphere in a campus-like setting with high prestige identity. 5. Land Use Types. The intent of the following policies is to encourage land uses and development consistent with the design goal for the Haven Avenue Corridor as an intensive, high-quality gateway into the community. a. The primary land use function along Haven Avenue is intended to be of an administrative/professional and office nature. However, on the parcels directly adjacent to the railroad, the Planning Commission may consider additional uses permitted in Subarea 6, subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit, and a finding that such a use will be consistent with the stated design goal for the Haven Avenue Corridor and all other provisions of the Overlay District. 17.30-52 11/00 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 b. Select ancillary reseamh services and commercial and business support service uses shall not exceed 20 pement of the floor area in any Master Planned development. Concentration of such uses in any building or along the street frontage is not permitted. c. See Table 17.30.030 for a list of the permitted or conditionally permitted uses for the Haven Avenue Overlay District. All other uses are prohibited. d. Fast food services are specifically excluded as a primary use. This would preclude the development of typical free-standing fast food restaurants, most of which require drive-through facilities, in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. However, fast food could be permitted as an ancillary or secondary use, subject to a Conditional Use Permit, as a part of a larger project, provided such use not be located directly adjacent to Haven Avenue. e. Accessory/Ancillary Use Restrictions. The purpose of this section is to set maximum development provisions for accessory/ancillary uses which are not normally permitted in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. The following provisions shall apply in the Haven Avenue Overlay District: (1) The total of all accessory/ancillary uses not listed as permitted or conditionally permitted uses* are limited to 20 percent of the total building and business area. The ancillary commercial and business support service uses listed in Section 5.b may exceed the 20 pement business area limitation. (2) Accessory/ancillary uses must be located within main buildings housing permitted principal uses. No outdoor accessory/ancillary uses are permitted. (3) No accessory/ancillary manufacturing uses are permitted in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. Only uses defined and listed in Section 17.30.030.D can be considered as accessory or ancillary uses. f. Automotive Fuelinq Services Criteria for Development. (1) Automotive Fueling Services are strictly prohibited within the urban centers of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, as shown in Figure 17.30.080-A. (2) No Automotive Fueling Service use shall be closer than Y2-mile of another Automotive Fueling Service use or similar type use, as measured from the nearest property line. (3) Automotive Fueling Services shall be designed to reflect the architectural standard and guidelines for professional office buildings to be developed within the Haven Avenue Overlay District. No corporate "prototype" architectural design will be permitted. (4) Automotive Fueling Services must be developed and constructed as part of, and concurrently with, a professional office complex. 6. Master Planned Development. The intent of this section is to provide for integrated development at the earliest possible time in the review process. Through the Master 17.30-53 11/00 /03 Rancho Cucarnonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 Plan process, them are opportunities to coordinate the efforts of single or multiple property owners and discourage piecemeal development. Finally, master planning of defined areas will avoid development of single parcels of land in a manner, which would prevent or preclude future development of adjacent parcels in the best way feasible. It is not the intention of the master planning process to cast future development patterns in stone. Rather, it is an attempt to discover problems before they develop, to deal with issues while they can be solved, and to take advantage of opportunities while they exist. The standards and guidelines, which follow, are intended to apply to all projects and should not be constrained by parcel lines or specific site boundaries. a. A Conceptual Master Plan shall be submitted for Planning Commission approval, together with any development proposal, including subdivision or parcel map applications. Such Master Plan shall address relationships to other parcels within the Master Plan area. b. At minimum, Master Plans shall indicate conceptual building locations, overall circulation, points of ingress and egress to both public and private streets, parking lot layouts, conceptual grading and drainage, areas to be used for landscaping and plazas, pedestrian circulation, and common signing. Areas intended for common use, such as shared access, reciprocal parking, or pedestrian plazas shall also be identified. In addition, a statement of architectural intent and/or conceptual elevations shall be submitted to indicate how the architectural concepts including style, form, bulk, height, orientation, and materials relate to other buildings or projects within the planning area as well as to the overall design goal for Haven Avenue. c. The Master Plan boundaries indicated in Figure17.30.080-B are logical planning boundaries based upon physical constraints and property ownership. These boundaries may be modified when it is determined that the Master Plan is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. The City Planner may require master planning of property outside the Overlay District, adjacent to a project proposal, where necessary to assure integrated development and promote the goal of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. d. No parcel map or subdivision map shall be accepted or approved without concurrent submittal and approval of a Master Plan to assure integrated development consistent with the goal of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. e. Architecture within a Master Planned development shall have a compatible design style, with variation, in the building style, form, and materials in accordance with the architectural standards of the Overlay District. f. Lot Size. Minimum parcel size shall be 2' acres with a minimum parcel depth of 225 feet within a Master Plan development. A 300-foot minimum lot width shall also be required, consistent with the access control policies. The Planning Commission may waive these requirements when it is determined that the parcel is part of a Master Plan, which is consistent with the intent, and purpose of the Overlay District. All lots of record are allowed to develop according to the requirements of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. g. Access. Vehicular access onto Haven Avenue shall be discouraged wherever suitable altemative access may be developed from other streets as determined through the Master Plan process. If vehicular access onto Haven Avenue is granted, said access shall be shared with adjacent parcels. The minimum distance between drive approaches shall be 300 feet with 100 feet being the 17.30-54 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 minimum distance between a drive approach and the curb return of any intersection along Haven Avenue. Also, reciprocal parking and access easements shall be required, where appropriate, with any development proposal. h. Public transit facilities shall be considered within ali Master Plans. Convenient pedestrian access shall be provided to designated transit facilities, such as bus stops. i. On-site circulation for both pedestrians and vehicles shall consider existing or planned circulation patterns on adjacent properties. Connections shall be made, where appropriate, to foster more integrated development and enhance pedestrian movement. 7. Site Orientation. The following standards are intended to promote integrated, pedestrian-oriented, office park development in a campus-like setting: Pedestrian Orientation. a. Site planning, including building configuration and placement, must create opportunities for courtyards and plazas and other landscaped open spaces and promote safe and convenient pedestrian movement with continuous landscaped pathways between buildings. b. Parking areas and circulation aisles along the Haven Avenue street frontage are discouraged and may only be approved through the Master Plan process when it is determined appropriate and necessary to implement the design goal of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. Their visual impact shall be fully mitigated through dispersed parking areas and extensive landscaping and berming. c. Vehicular circulation around the rear and side portions of a site is encouraged. Circulation aisles, which fragment or disrupt the connection of pedestrian spaces throughout a project, shall be avoided to the extent possible. Parkinq. d. The use of dispersed parking areas, which provide convenient access to buildings without interrupting interior pedestrian spaces, is encouraged to reduce the need for large parking lots. Where large parking lots are necessary, they shall be located in areas less visible from Haven Avenue and their visual impact fully mitigated with building placement and extensive landscaping and berming. e. On-street parking along Haven Avenue shall be prohibited. f. Building placement at or near the streetscape building setback is strongly encouraged within all developments, particularly on corner lots with high visibility. Multiple building placement should provide variable streetscape setbacks to reduce streetscape monotony. 17.30-55 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 FIGURE 17.30.080-B MASTER PLAN AREAS Revised 4/1/92  MASTER PLAN AREAS CIRCULATION ~ 100' FLO.W. 88' M less R.O.W. RAIL SERVICE +*'+++- Proposed TRAILS/ROUTES O O O O Pedestrian ee·e Bicycle ~3~r~ Regional MLdtl-U~e -~ ~ Special 8treetecape/ ~ Lendscal~ng __ Power Line/ Utility Easement ~-"-- Creeks & Chaonel~ ~ Bridge ~ ~Perk ~ ~ S~tlon Acres 17.30-56 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 .Setbacks. g. A 45-foot average landscape setback and a minimum 45-foot building setback shall be required along Haven Avenue, as measured from the ultimate face of curb, including existing lots of record and condominium lots or lots within a center when designed as an integral part of a Master Planned development. h. Ancillary service and loading areas shall be designed and located where least visible from public view and adjacent properties designated "Industrial Park." i. All existing and new utilities, including electrical services less than 34.5 ky, within the project shall be installed underground. 8. Landscapinq Requirements. The intent of the following standards is to enhance the visual quality of the streetscape and provide an attractive and pleasant working environment in a campus-like setting. Minimum Landscape Coveraqe. a. A minimum 25 pement of net lot area (excludes right-of-way dedications and private streets) shall be landscaped areas and pedestrian hardscape plazas and courtyards. b. The landscape/hardscape coverage requirement may be modified for individual parcels within master planned developments when it is determined that the master plan, as a whole, meets the required coverage and the project is consistent with the intent and purposes of the design goal for Haven Avenue. c. .A maximum 5 percent credit toward the required landscape/hardscape coverage may be permitted where appropriate public art is to be displayed in a setting, whi(~h enhances pedestrian spaces and building architecture. d. A consistent streetscape design theme shall be developed along the Haven Avenue straetscape, which incorporates intensified landscaping with specimen size trees, alluvial rockscape, mounding, meandering sidewalks, and appropriate street furniture. Landscaping materials shall be selected which provide an historic link to the City's past, such as Eucalyptus windrows, citrus trees, and grape vines. In addition, a program of street name monument signs shall be developed to include Iow profile, natural alluvial rock monument signs with individual letters formed in a sandblasted concrete face. Bermin.q. e. Landscaping and berming shall be designed to create visual interest and variety to the straetsoape; enhance building architecture; screen utilities; buffer views of automobiles, pavement, and service areas; and define and distinguish the pedestrian environment from vehicular spaces. Water Conservation. f. A combination of water-conserving landscape and irrigation techniques are required such as the use of drought tolerant plant species and hardscape (non- irrigated) surfaces, and special irrigation systems such as drip emitters, Iow 17.30-57 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 volume stream rotors, deep watering of trees and shrubs, tonsiometers to measure soil moisture, and automatic timers. g. Landscape materials shall be selected for their Iow maintenance, drought tolerance, and heat and wind tolerance. 9. Open Space and Pedestrian Environment. The intent of this section is to promote the functional design and location of pedestrian spaces, and provide convenient pedestrian circulation on- and off-site and promote a campus-like setting. a. The development of a pedestrian node or focal point, such as a plaza or courtyard is required within all projects. b. The location of plazas and courtyards should encourage maximum pedestrian use and be separated and/or buffered from vehicular parking and circulation. Such locations may be near a prominent building entrance or along a centralized pedestrian path. Pedestrian Facilities. c. Pedestrian plazas or courtyards shall be designed to create an attractive, comfortable, and functional setting with a "sense of place." A combination of the following design elements are encouraged, but are not limited to: pavement or surface texture; elevation/grade changes; use of landscape materials and structures to provide shade and define enclosed spaces; seating (e.g., benches, steps, or raised planters); and outdoor eating areas. In addition, the use of water features, covered walkways, kiosks and public art are encouraged. d. Trash receptacles, drinking fountains, light standards, and other street furniture shall be designed to enhance the appearance and function of open space areas. _ e. Convenient pedestrian circulation shall be provided throughout all projects to connect parking areas and public transit facilities with buildings and pedestrian open spaces. 10. Architecture. The following standards are intended to promote a high-quality office park image with high prestige identity. Urban Style. a. Desirable architecture along Haven Avenue shall project a high-quality, progressive, sophisticated, and urban style of development. While the use of a variety of exterior materials may be permitted to achieve this image; Spanish, Mediterranean, or traditional architecture styles are not generally considered appropriate for office buildings. b. Variations in architectural styles, construction methods, and materials for certain ancillary uses, such as restaurants and banks, may be permitted where the architecture is exemplary and consistent with the high quality image required for Haven Avenue and where a particular design is necessary and more appropriate considering the intended use of the building. 17.30-58 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 Multiple Story. c. Multiple story buildings of sufficient mass are encouraged if they reflect the scale and proportion of the Haven Avenue right-of-way and streetscape setbacks. Low linear buildings are discouraged. d. Building design elements that are considered inappropriate for an office park atmosphere include retail type storefront elevations (linear configurations, continuous ground floor glazing, multiple doorways), and numerous overhead roll-up doors which promote concentrations of ancillary commercial and business support services, and are therefore prohibited. e. Service and loading areas shall be screened from public view and adjoining properties, wherever possible, to reduce site design constraints on future adjacent development. The design of loading doors shall be consistent with office architectural design features. All building equipment must be housed within the building or below finished grade. All equipment screening must be architecturally integrated into the overall office building design. Architectural Variety. f. Within the Overlay District, all building features must exhibit an office style architecture regardless of the type of accessory/ancillary uses or equipment contained within the building or on the site. Architectural planes shall have variation in depth and angle to create variety and interest in the basic form and silhouette of the building. g. Articulation of the elevation surfaces is encouraged through the use of openings and recesses, which create texture and shadow patterns and provide variety in the building plane or surface. h. Building entrances shall be well articulated and project a formal entrance statement through variation of architectural planes, pavement surface treatment, and landscaped plazas. i. Accent treatment such as changes in exterior materials and texture is encouraged in conjunction with variation in the major form-giving elements of a structure. Siqns. j. A coordinated Uniform Sign Program shall be required for any development, including wall and monument signs. Building wall signs shall consist of individual letters and canned signs are prohibited. The size, number, typical design, and location of the signs, as permitted by the City's Sign Ordinance, shall be submitted with the development application and be reviewed concurrently. 11. Urban Centers. The following standards are intended to promote the highest quality development and intensity to create community focal points or "urban centers" near the key intersections of 4th Street and Foothill Boulevard. a. The applicability of these urban center standards for specific parcels shall be determined through the Master Plan review process. 17.30-59 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 b. Multiple sion/buildings shall be of the highest design quality, particularly at the immediate corners of 4th Street and Foothill Boulevard. Desirable structural components include steel and concrete in conjunction with curtain walls, spandrels, and glass. Wood frame structures are discouraged. c. A minimum 30 percent of net lot area (excludes right-of-way dedications and private streets) shall be landscaped areas and pedestrian hardscape plazas or courtyards. d. Special landscaping and streetscape design features shall be developed for the intersections at 4th Street and Foothill Boulevard to create an intensive and prestigious gateway entry into Rancho Cucamonga and the Haven Avenue Corridor. e. The use of parking structures is encouraged to promote intensified development and maximize the site area devoted to urban pedestrian plazas and courtyards, Parking structures shall be harmoniously designed with the main building and located around the rear or side portions of the site. f. The minimum pamel size shall be 5 acres unless waived by the Planning Commission when it is determined that the parcel is designed as an integral part of a master planned development consistent with the intent and purpose of the Overlay District. 17.30-60 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30. 080 FIGURE '[7.30.080-H I 17.30-76 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 G. Subarea 6. 1. Land Use Desiqnation: Industrial Park. 2. Primary Function: The function of this area is to provide for office development and support administrative services for industrial-related activities. Development in this subarea will provide for the high-quality character associated with "Office Park" type development. Haven Avenue serves as a major access and gateway to the City. 3. Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses: Refer to Table 17.30.030. 4. Access and Circulation: Subject to modification, especially at intersections. 120-foot Right-of-Way o Haven Avenue, 4th Street, and 6th Street (east of Haven Avenue). A median will be constructed to Iimif left rum movements from Haven Avenue directly onto properties in Subarea 6. 94 f,t. 12q, f't.~ ROW lO0-foot Right-of-Way - Arrow Route, 17.30-77 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 88-foot Right-of-Way - 6th Street (west of Haven Avenue) and Jersey Boulevard. 64ft. · 88 ft..ROW 66-foot Right-of-Way - 7th Street, 8th Street, 9th Street, Center Agenue, and all other local streets. 5. Special Consideration: For property within the boundaries of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, refer to Section 17.30.050.A for a modified list of permitted land uses and special development criteria. 17.30-78 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 H. Subarea 7. 1. Land Use Desiqnation: Industrial Park. 2. Primary Function: Subarea 7 occupies an area directly south of Foothill Boulevard which represents an important land use edge between the City's Industrial area and a large master planned community to the nor[h. Foothill Boulevard is the City's primary commercial corridor and serves as a gateway to the City. Along Foothill Boulevard, the intersections at Haven, Milliken, and Rochester Avenues have been designated as activity centers to promote concentrated activity and establish a unique design theme. 3. Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses: Refer to Table 17.30.030. 4. Access and Circulation: Subject to modification, especially at intersections and along Foothill Boulevard. 120-foot Right-of-Way- Haven Avenue, Foothill Boulevard, Milliken Avenue, and Day Creek Boulevard. A median will be constructed to limit left turn movements from Haven Avenue, Foothill Boulevard, and Milliken Avenue directly onto properties in Subarea 7. 1 2.0. ,?_ t.~. ROW 100-foot Right-of-Way - Arrow Route (no median on Arrow Route), Rochester Avenue, and Etiwanda Avenue. 17.30-80 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 88-foot Right-of-Way - Cleveland Avenue. I I '64 ft. I 66-foot Right-of-Way - all local streets. 5. Special Considerations: Foothill Boulevard is a major arterial, which is projected to carry a significant volume of traffic. In order to limit vehicular access problems, the minimum pamel size requirement along Foothill Boulevard is 2 acres and the minimum pamel width is 200 feet. Additional Foothill Boulevard design standards and guidelines are provided in Section 17.30.060. For property within the boundaries of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, refer to Section 17.30.080.A for a modified list of permitted land uses and special development criteria. The San Bemardino County Law and Justice Center, at the comer of Foothill Boulevard and Civic Center Drive (adjacent to the Civic Center), includes a detention facility since municipal court facilities are provided. On the east side of Haven Avenue, north of Arrow Route, Development Code provisions for the General Commercial district shall apply to the anchor store and the adjoining northerly building. Development and use of satellite buildings in the Center are subject to provisions of this chapter. At the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue, adjoining the Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Park and Rancho Cucamonga Stadium, uses allowed in the Recreational Commercial General Plan Land Use category shall be permitted within the planned 27-acre Mixed Use Center. To preserve and enhance the image of the community, special considerations shall be given to the quality of site design, architecture, and landscaping of all 17.30-81 1/03 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.080 properties adjacent to the 1-15 Freeway. Attractive screening of outdoor work, loading, and storage areas and roof- and ground-mounted equipment from significant freeway points-of-view shall be required. On the south side of Foothill Boulevard, a Community Commercial Retail Center is Conditionally Permitted subject to a Master Plan on a 14.45 acre parcel bounded by Spruce Avenue on the west, Elm Avenue on the east, and Eucalyptus Street on the south. This site is a logical extension of the Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard Activity Center, which encourages a mix of uses to function as an active people place and be lively well into the night for the residents of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Compatibility with adjacent existing and intended Industrial Park development shall be demonstrated through site planning, building design, and landscaping. All retail business uses permitted in the Terra Vista Community Commercial designation are permitted within the Center and are incorporated by reference. A Master Sign Program shall be required and shall be consistent with sign code requirements for Commercial Retail centers. 17.30-82 1/03