Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1981/02/09 - Agenda Packet 4r 1 I , 1., ,r ar 4_S 1 n ' � 1' 1 � 1 A. 1 � 1 , d ' 1� • o<<c�:,ko;� ��/cam o c s'r CITY T'Y OF c r RANCHO CLr-AMONGA a _ o PLANNING COMMISSION B z AGENT, 1977 Monday February 9. 1981 LION'S PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 9161 BASE LINE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call Commissioner Dahl Commissioner Sceranka Commissioner King Commissioner Tolstoy Commissioner Rempel Iii. Announcements 45 Min. IV. Consideration of Recommendations for the Draft Part. and Recreation Element At the February 2 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the Draft Park and Recreation EIement. They adopted the Park Plan with the request that the Community Services Director return to the February 9 meeting with re- commendations for implementation. The Planning Commission will consider for adoption recommendations on implementation and revision:: to the Draft Park and Recreation Element text. L 60 Min. V. Consideration of Recommendations for the Planned Community Area rl u� The Planning Commission has received requests to consider. alternative land use dansitics in the Terra Vista project J area. Staff will be providing recommendations on these requests. The Planning Commission should review and take action on any further changes in the Planned Community area. 1.5 Min. Break 1 } ` t Planning Commission Agenda -2- February 9, 1981 VI. Wrap-up of remaining land use considerations Within the last few weeks, a few requests for land use considerations in planning areas previously discussed by the Planning Commission nave been received. These \ will be presented to the Planning Commission for their consideration and action. It is not anticipated that k they will be continued to a later meeting. 45 Minm VII. Review of Draft Environmental Impact Report The PIanning Commission reviewed at their. previous :meeting, topics A-I of the Environmental Impact Assessment. The remaining topics will be discussed l by the Planning Commission at this meeting. The final consideration of the Environmental document } will occur at the time the Planr,<ng Commission con- siders adoption of the Draft General Plan. ,,Aqi Adjournment The Planning Commission will adjourn to Tuesday, February 17, 1981 at 7 p.m, to continue the r-eneral Plan hearing process at the Lion's Park Community .gilding, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA G��t'�MOnG MEMORANDUM r Date: February 4- . 1981 u > LQ77 To: Planning Coftmission From: Bill Holley, Director, Community Services Department Subject: PARK AND RECREATION ELEMENT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA DRAFT GENERAL PLAN Find attached for your consideration the revisions of the text relating to the above referenced subject. The changes are reflective of those presented in my memorandum to you of January 9, •1980 and of Commission direction on February 2, 1981 . Two items of note: Page 92: The population figure of 148,000 will probably need a further revision once density issues are settled; and Page 93: The first item under Policies is the financial statement requested by the Commission. It is a rather long statement with a lot of qualifiers, but it does give a strong direction without limitations to the financing methods. It does negate the need for the third paragraph on page 94 as it is now somewhat redundant. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call . W H nm _ 5`,' and changes, horsing prices and rent, vacancy rates, and hou:;e.ho:1-4 characteristics such as workers per Mlisehold, number of commuters, and household income. Housing information Proarcm. The C;ty shall seek to employ a Housing Coordinator with re- sponsibility to provide information regarding housing programs, particularly to low-income, handicapped, elderly, and monitority groups; to coordinate various funding programs; to encourage developer participation in housing efforts; to initiate housing programs torgeted toward meeting the City's housing objectives; and to discourage discrimination and redlining. It is important that the Housing Coordinator use the available housing assistance programs and grant funds in the most expeditious and highly leveraged manner possible. For example, the Housing Coordinator should inform developers that financing through HUD's Section 3 and 235 programs and the Farmers Home Administration programs are available to them as well as to the public agencies. PUBLIC FACILITIES The rampant growth that led voters to Alta Loma, Cucamonga, and Etiwenda to incorporate in 1977 left many serious problems for the new com- munity. Among these problems was the need to provide public facilities that had lagged behind when the population onslaught began. The purpose of this element is to restore some balance be- tween the City's 52,000 plus residents and its community services, especially recreational facili- ties and schools. a, PARKS AND RECREATION q. ' The provision of public parks and recreational facilities was identified as one of the most im- portant agendas for the City by the citizen who participated in developing the General Plan. Quantifying the need for such facilities is a diffi- cult task because it depends on many factors. The recommended park and recreation standards established by the National Recreation and Parks 8edway/Conlin Urban and EnWronme:ntal Manners and Designers San Francisco California Association (NRPA) are useful indicators by which the recreational needs of a community can be de- termined based on national standards, and by the same token measure deficiencies towards meeting those needs. Currently, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has 60 acres of parkland, 20 acres of which have been developed. Applicction of the NRPA recom- mended standards of 5 acres per 1,000 population to the current population of about 53,000 reM- dents, indicates the City has a deficiency of 205 acres. Put another way, to meet the recom- mended national park standards for the present population, the City must quadruple its current inventory of local recreational facilities. In addition, a central city park of approximately 100 acres 260•-acres is required to serve the needs of City residents, but none presently exists. National standards indicate that the 53,000 residents of Rancho Cucamonga could support a regional park of 1,000 acres, While this demanu is in part satis- fied by the three county regional parks located within an hours driving time of the City, an addi- tioial regional park located in close proximity to the City is needed. Regardless of the appro- priateness of the national standards for Rancho Cucamonga, the City is for from meeting the needs of its residents. Another way of assessing recreational needs is to consider the number of active recreational facili- ties that can be supported by the population. Such facilities include, for example, baseball/softball fields, tennis and basketball courts, and swimming pools. The City by itself is deficient in its provi- sion of these facilities. A partially mitigating factor in this present deficiency is the availability of school facilities for community recreational use. These facilities, totaling approximately 100 combined acres are limited, however, in recrea- tional opportunities, and activity is primarily con- fined to open field sports. Sedxeay/Cooke Urban and Environmental Planners and Designers San Francisco California !% 92 J, I. TABLE 111-9 INVENTORY OF SELECTED OUTDOOR r RECREATIONAL FACILITIES Number Of Facilities vat:- FacilitX Standard Needed able* Deficient Baseball I per 12,000 4 2 2 Softball I per 3,000 17 39** — Tennis I per 4,000 13 15 — Basketball I per 2,000 26 52 — Swimming I per 25,000 2 2 — lommmunity Center I per 25,000 2 2 — * Includes those facilities on school sites. The ,C public accessibility to these facilities is !; contingent upon agreements between the City and the school districts. Although it would appear that the City is not deficient when '+ school facilities are included in the inventory, school use of these facilities is given higher priority, and the actual amount of time available for general public use is limited. ;: ** These are improvised fields set of school play- grounds. There are no formal, dedicated soft- ball diamonds in the City. While national standards are useful as general indicators of park and recreational needs, the citizens of Rancho Cuca...onga must establish appropriate standards for meeting their own specific recreational needs. The challenge of providing desirable levels of parkland is further G' compounded by the population growth forecast for y- 148,000 the City. A projected population of-46e-00G- represents a tripling of the current population, requiring the provision of many more acres of s=' parkland beyond those discussed in Vie preceding paragraphs. In addressing the task of providing park and recreational facilities to residents of Rancho Cucamonga it is necessary to recognize c that two separate tasks exist for the City. The first task, and the more difficult one, is bringing the existing developed portions of the City up to fir standard. The second task is making parkland provision for the area subject to future development. Sedway/Cooke Urban and Environmental Planners and Designers San Francisco California ill� i � 93 The spatial distribution of parks and recreational facilities must strike a balance between the need for accessibility, which is favored by a dispersed pattern, and ever increasing maintenance costs, which tend to increase with the number of parks. At the same time, association of City park facilities with school district facilities is another !slue which must be addressed. Finally, the rt-tmeational needs of the various segments of the City's population mast be recognized. OBJECTIVES The objectives enumerated belo v and the subsequent policies shall guide the Ci'rs policies and decisions in providing parks and recreational facilities for its residents. o Provide park and recreational facilities at a level which reflects the high priority assigned to these facilities by City residents. o Design park and recreational facilities to serve the recreational and social interaction needs of City residents of all ages, economic situations, and physical conditions. o Site parks and recreational facilities within the City in a manner which-Flevek**-ersense of--commuc4*--GoWe--cnd- fosters orderly development. o Maximize opportunities for the joint use of public facilities such as schools, flood contrc!, and areas under the jurisdiction of other public agencies. POLICIES * The City shall aggressively employ a multi-faceted approach in financing o the acquisition, development and o The City shall actively support the maintenance of City parklands. That development of the proposed Chaffey approach shall include, but not be Regional Park. This proposed park, shown in limited to.. explora.tion and application Figure 111-5, is being considered by the when appropriate, financing parkland Regional Parks Advisory Commission and the improvements through the City's general County Regional Barks Department. It would fund, state and federal grants in aid, occupy several hundred acres of the County development fees, gifts & donations, Flood Control District's Deer and Day Creek benefit assessment districts and the spreading ground and would be limited to i creation and implementation of a mark- riding and hiking trails and overnight e. lands Joint Powers Authority. campsites not accessible by automobile. Sedway/Cooke Urban and Environmental Planners and Designers. San Francisco Californian IFl..,' _ . .. 'e:. r 94 o The City shall develop o City perk within the area shown on Figure 111-5. - The City pork will primarily serve as c major facility for actZve recreation by may City residents. The park-wound-include facilities such as playfields, playgrounds, tennis courts, swimming pools, and outdoor assrmbly or performing arts could provide area. It-wA-be the location of citywide community acitivities and athletic events. Given this function and its a general location, the park will be-?he- major focal point of the City. Its image at -a&the center of the City and its role in may defining an identity for the City-will-be strengthened by integrating the park with could the civic center, which-ehmrld-be located general In the some*vicinity. The intersection of Haven and Foothi;i will be the location of commercial, business, and offices uses serving Rancho C. -.%amonga. The park should be accessible from the: sur- rounding uses and should also include passive recreational facilities such as picnic tables, benches, and landscaping for use by shoppers and persons working near the park. Delete - -11w dekselepmer�of-ti Yxx�C-s1�eH-6e�Fi-- rano 4niw.t-br4k,e-City�s-gener'ol-kin4- arrd-�a-�ert-by-the-feer i rnposed tirr�a1F- a9ew-devek""enta,-•botirTesk*ntio{ and•- 4*n-re9ident4e6--A,dd'l;e Hy;-ainc �idy-wiN-eplrac4-visitorrfronrorrtside-of -- . . RAne`aa-f_r�camenga,--i4-vuoerld-be-appnv�- priete•-far-the-Grtr te-seele-th e-Elam*&-- -fincmeW. -per#kipatiorr3n-park-develop-- ener!ts.-- a Within residential areas developed prior to the dale of this Plan, the City shall provide new parks and upgrade existing parks to «: . achieve an overall ratio of -nw ti- communi ty vm*jhbGFhooWneighborhood parks of 5 acres per 1,000 population. In residential areas developed subsequent to the date of this Plan, the City shall require developer dedication of park space or in-lieu fees to achieve the some overall ratio as applies in existing residential areas. Sedway/Cooke Urban and Environmental Planners and Designers San Francisco California ,r b7 MCI rT N614H1aoo� ptiQIC o The City shall develop a three-t;er system of parks devoted to meeting the recreational �a j needs of its residents. This three-tier system of park organization shall include--muiH`•J11W community -neighborlioodr neighborhood, and mini- O�LIME aoigtttxrrrlrood parks. � toD r.:,•^":;. @ t t% community, - The terms --nwLt9-neighborhood---and and mini neighborhoodkparks shall include any area &,= ;! ;t;:' :` ' of land dedicated to the public and ve improved for recreational use. These terms shall include parks which provide UYE improved recreational areas oriented s r along a linear -axis provided by a trail, _ the edge of a natural feature, or a roadway, provided that the park area is at least 80 feet in width and in the case /�v A of a pal k along a roadway, is set back at least feet from edge of the paved Nl=iGHt�otz}(gv surfacee.. These terms include improved A� YAtZK recreational areas of less than 80 feet in width which are oriented along a � �g pedestrian, equestrian, or bicycle trail, fi@E1614�gK 900op except that credit for these areas in t"ta�p satisfoing the nbove standard shall be tl L. awared according to the schedule shown below. �MINt-PARK AMMk R• NO eo 100 a 90 q � y • xN� f�SJ 11J V11l �� P��He�� ; VAR Q 60 twRx (DELETE ILLUSTRATION)"/ io ; 50 fty'1 �rj F � s. ;�✓ a xi:. Sys to •G� I 40 s � � m 30 o U 20 I: 10 20 '30. 40 50 60 70 60 Average Trail Width in Feet SedwaY/Cooke .Vrban and Environmental Planners and designers San Francisco California In order for trailway acreage (average trail width times trail length) to br: credited towards park standards, the trail must provide at least one mode of travel, either pedestrian, bicycle, or equestrian. For trails 20 feet or more is width, the percent credit may be doubled or tripled by providing for two or three modes of travel, respectively. For example, a trail 40 feet wide providing all three modes would receive 100 percent credit. Park lands acquired by the City, either through acquisition or developer dedication, shall be allocated between community, -roH 4i_r4ekjhb raeW-Barks-end-neighbor- and mini parks. hood-paFUr, C M. r1i ty _MUk++-Alei lhb"1x ad�-Parks. The following s�iou�d general standards -shall- be used for the community development o sRutti-+eighbwheetl•parks. In areas of-new-residential dvrelopment, community should _n wW_r#ei9hbeFbeed-parks•stwlf be located to serve a population-ef-epproxim6aelp a0-5la,000�aee+ns within a 3ervice•sedivs 3 mile radius. should - - Access t- be provided by modes of transportation in addition to the automobile. Community - -Mut#i-naighbpr-hacA-parks shall be 20-100 acres in size. shoula - When possible, such parks -zha* be considered for location -kwA#od- adjacent to elementary school sites. - Landscaping in multi-neighborhood parks should - -be drought resistant. Community - -W4=i-�beFheod-Parks may include competition size swimming pools, tennis courts, play fields for activities such as ".' baseball softball, football and soccer, and racquetball and volleyball courts, picnic arena, and a community recreational center providing multi- purpose assembly rooms. The type and number of facilities located in a-P*A-fl--- Sedway/Cooke Urban and Environmental Planners and Designers San Francisco California community _4wi9l4h9r**-, -park shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Services Director. communi ty - In -mua#im4"9hberlaomd- parks provided through developer dedication, all improvements and facilities with the exception of community recreational centers, shall be constructed by the developer, or when a fee- is paid in lieu of dedication, the fee shall be adequate to cover the cost of these facilities and improvements. Neighborhood Parks. The follouving general standards shall be used for the development of neighborhood parks. should - Neighborhood parks-shell-be located to •serve a population --of- 2 000-10r000•- 1 mile radius _forsons within a SBF�rce a�iuso#-a�4— - Neighborhood parks shall be 5-20 acres in size. should - Access to neighborhood parks --Sha'il-- emphasize modes of transportation other than automobile. The service area of a neighborhood park should not be divided by natural or ortifical barriers such as thoroughfares, railroads, freeways, and water courses. 'All improvements and facilities shall be made and constructed by the developer, or • when a fee is paid in lieu of dedication, the fee should be sufficient to meet and provide the specified requirements. Lands included within a neighborhood park shall not include slopes in excess of 10 percent; provided, however, that lands with slopes in excess of 10 percent may be included within a neighborhood park if prior to dedication, a determination is made by the Community Services Director that such lands would serve a recreational purpose. Sodway/Cooke Urban and Environmental Planners and Designers San Francisw California 0 1VJ The entire area of a neighborhood park should -sboU- be improved and landscaped for recreational use with drought tolerant landscaping to the maximum extent consistent with this use. should - When possible, neighborhood parks-sheW- be considered for location -be--located- adjacent to elementary schools. - A neighborhood park may include such facilities as tot lots, tennis courts, playfields, for activities such as baseball/softball, football and soccer and basketball and volleyball courts. When a neighborhood park serves primarily senior citizens, a community center may be substituted for these facilities. The type and number of facilities located in a . neighborhood park shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Services Director. "Mini-Park". The Mini Park shall be -WO _boad-P4ork.--fie-Ci4-t--sheH-en-- empl oyed by the City in instances where `aurnge---- ---deve ent---of-m"_ it is determined the best interest ofbcod-{arks-wi#bin exist*rg-and Y+ew the immediate surrounding development s+es►deetial_.woos,---Sk*._fely w4nq--.ner-cl__ will be served. strmdcuds-sluall usr+d for-ihe-d®vekKxnea�*-- ..- Mini Part: size shall be one lot to _ l acre. arm,w -60Q-�I,OOfl fcwi-Fedw�sa- - - Administration and maintenance of the _dinaecuions of a -reeArnei Mini Park shall be as in the Community gfaborleocx#-- ' and Neighborhood Park. � � Prox+maaefeet-++a- ;a leogtb_arui30.r-�(1-f$et ap-vrieitk�;-bdt- The landscaping and design of a mini arnalJer- t-4f-4iwmnsie%d-prepe 4ys- park shp". relate to the -are-acceptable, recreational needs of -he surroundi.g development. - -min+-neighbar�wodperks�k�all be �eeatec4- _.?a_relat�uisually-.te-aeacta��eeideneea-ivr- _.order_to..deuaelop-a-sense.-of-possessk"- _=d._.social--control--evef--4Me--area.-- i' _tlaweyacT.th"e-parks-shall-tom-sited-ond- _scree.aed--to--Protect-_*e,--visdel•-•a d- _auditor-Y-Ptiww*ef-ifpwmdiasely-edjeeei* _resWences.- - _Adcsvaisbcotioa-and-r�aiwtenanceof-mini,-- _ae..ighborhorttl--marks---sHeU---be--�- _resporuibWsy-of--the.-residenta-cs--lhe -- _mini-neighboekoed.---------�endscap'weg-- Sedway/Cooke Urban and Environmental Planners and Designers San Francisco California lui +na4eriofs,-•both-pcving-and'Plarrtsy-�tmlf �e•-xlected••-tv-minimize-nrrairrtern;rr� frosts:-Parks-shah--be-siie�t-ro•-at'rlizr -street•-iights-erhieh-vvactid-br otheranse •proaidedfor ifie-mini-neighborhood.-- - 'T�-Iarrdscoping-and-desigrr-vf�a-m'irri� •neighbo__^hood-park-JtralF-rrFsfc--fv--t•ke -recreaHonol- .-of-fhe-sarroanding lvighborhood.---4eenagerv,-advft7,-M7nt YOtw*-ehikfiron-would-benefit-from-hard= avrface-eex�rts-or-i�oifttsvrts-•far-•bal h csrnes;'-perhaps---tennis--^ct,u, 1s--ror {�aekhorinds.----Eiderly�"residerYf s-tivavkf ' kiere.-frt--from-sneftwrzd-�nciosores•wittr t':c:rsroat•-to•-octivitY rn•easvr-gardenirtg 'areas:--Very-Yoenrog- Chi•tdrtit-regaire-a stTuMvred••pfivr u.vu,-with Aemerfssuch -- 'as-wafer.-ScmY};-ortd-rfimuing-.-.trvcitn•es9- separc2ted••frorrrvf der'chitdn'rr'arr&-teens,' - m0h-benohe9.$er-#"9,,em- TRAILS The preceding section describes a plan for providing parks and recreational facilities within the City. A key element of this plan is the Provision of parks and recreational facilities at three levels — regional, City, and neighborhood. Regional facilities include the Cucamonga-Guasii and proposed Chaffey Regional Parks and the San Bernardino National Forest. The plan also proposes a central City park and a series of multi- neighborhood parks. Access to these park facilities is of critical impor- tance. While all will be accessible by the automobile, there are several reasons for i' providing alternative means of access to these facilities. Long-term prospects for the price and supply of gasoline indicate that this means of transportation will become increasingly less available, especially to lower income persons. Use of the automobile has adverse air quality and noise imMcts associated with it. The use of modes of transportation other than the automobile can provide a valuable recreational experience. yThere are currently no pedestrian trails or bike paths within the City. Equestrian trails in Alta I y`..' SedwaY/Cooke Urban and Environmental Planners and Designers San Francisco Ca lifamia r 108 IMPLEME.WATION t..r Parks and Recreation In order t a attain the parkland requirements calle the City appropriate for by th s Plan*shall adopt''tegislation aasi mFng- tr- requiring dedication of land, payment `recr^atict"fee'andTvqu'pirm-dedicetion-ofAand-eI - of in lieu fees, or a combination ', -in- iew-r s m-o-i`a^dj+ -¢O-subdiaisic 4'- thereof as a condition of subdivision -approval'-' s 'd ^°n -requirmg;�r approval . The City shall actively -evnd'i'tio•-to,4he"am.0 Vel-of-cfim*orFo' "r mt r and aggressively pursue appropriate -the dednatioTMof-lmd■-theVOMent'Of` esm 1'eb- State and Federal grant in aid programs -therecrF,'orvcombmatr°^�rFb°ttiv{er-theparpo: :- of benefit to the parkland arauisition -of->rovi,ling'neighborhood-and-maiti-nei9t+barhrnd- and development plan. The City shall -parks--it"acevrdanc� -��1'- the--porgy- mod continue to actively explore varied =sttsFifew. l, desm1 ed- -shalt-bee-vdaptev-tp of creative and innovative f Cauncit- Council shall also investigate tte financing to achieve the object-ves desirabiiity of adopting legislation requiring tt e of this clement. reserva• ion of real property within subdivisions f4 it the pur;ose of providing neighborhood and mull neighbc rhood parks at the specific iac=tions shoe 6 in Figu-e 1!1-5, Parks and Recreation Plan.--R a-- _C-+#y-E Is- -Direetc r-to•-assist-City-residents-tin--!e epi+ g- -rrtirri.in ighhorhood-parks,-inrludinglhc-prcparatn n- -and-prc mulgotiorr•of-a-pubtirinfor.•notiorr-mane xt- -for this purposer The nea d to enhance the regional system shall I encourc ged by the City Council through adopti( of o re-oluiion supporting the creation of Chaffrly Regions I Park and forward some to cognizes it parties. ! Trails A key element of the overall open space/recre I- tional m itwork is the linkage between recreation A facilitie i. The primary means. of achieving tt is linkage is through an integrated citywide trr lit system. The means to implementing this syste in are two-fold. First, the City shall exercise i is outhorit;, under Section 66474 of the GoVernme it Cods to ensure that proposed subdivision rnaps c fe consister it with the multi-use trails system sho% In in Figure W-5. Trails provided by subdivisic ib may be tsed to satisfy park and recreation facili !y dedicaticn requirements in accordance with t sliding simle Shown earlier. Secondly, where t le City does not have jurisdiction, it must we 1k closely with the County's Regional Pc tk Departm(rnt, San Bernardino County Flood Conti -,it District and the U.S. Army Corps of Engine s, especiail;- to maximize trail development ale g flood control channels and through flood cant, I lands. Unless maintenance responsibility , Sedway/Cooke Urban and Environmental Planners and l lesigners San Francisco California kr 1 CITY Or RAh'CI3O CUCAMONGA GAO C`%CA'AM4, ' SIAFF REPORT C � � r O - C r z z U > 1977 DATE: February 9, 1981 10: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Barr; K. Hogan, City Planner BY: Steve McCutchan, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION ON RE UEST OF LEWIS HOMES C NCERN.N FTERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY ABSTRACT: This resort contains the review and assessment of the requests for changes to the Draft Land Use Plan made by the Lewis Company for Terra Vista Planned Community. All requests for changes increase density. Rec.mmendations will be to retain the Sedway/Cooky designations. BACKGROUND: Lewis Homes submitted a request at the February 2, 1981 meeting to change the Draft Land Use Plan for that area which is in- c' uded in the Terra Vista Planned Community. The letter which was submitted is attached to this report. T) assist you in your review of the Lewis Homes request, Staff has prepared three exhibits: Exhibit A: Illustrates the Draft Land Use Plan as proposed by Sedway/Cooke including the recent changes by the Plan- ning Commission along Rochester, directly south of the pro- posed junior high school site. The number of dwellings per- missable within the Terra Vista Plan is 7,946 (average of 10.8 per acre). Exhibit B: Illustrates the proposal by Lewis Homes as out- ine in he attached letter. The changes involve an in- crease of High Density (25-30 du/ac) southeast of Cleveland and Church (labeled area 1 ) ; an increase from Medium Density (5-14 du/ac) to Medium-High (15-24 du/ac) southwest of Milliken and Church (labeled area 2) ; an increase from Medium Density to Medium-High Density east of Milliken and north of the com- mercial frontage on Foothill (labeled area 3) ; an increase Planning Corrcrission February 9, 1981 Page 2 from Medium to Medium-High on Foothill frontage northwest of the corner of Foothill and Rochester (labeled area 4) ; and, moving the Neighborhood Commercial designation located on the southeast corner of Base Line and Milliken (labeled area 5) to the northeast corner of Haven and Base Line (labeled area 5a) and designating the southeast corner of Base Line and Milliken to Medium-Nigh (area 5). The changes, as proposed, would increase the overall dwelling unit count by 1 ,450 dwelling units to 9,396 (average of 12.77 du/ac an increase of approximately 2 du/ac) . Exhibit C: Illustrates the ;.ewis Homes proposal and also includes approximate numbers of change in dwelling units by area: - Area 1 . +623 du - Area 2: +234 du - Area 3: :224 du - Area 4: +234 du - Area 5: +200 du Area 6: -65 do TOTAL: 1 ,450 du ANALYSIS: In rev'ewing the Lewis Homes proposal , the following points were considered: 1 The traffic model prepared by DKS Associates illustrated that the street system in this area could not accommodate additional traffic generation; the Circulation Plan delineates a portion of this area as a "Special Impact Study Zone" and as stated on Page 58 of the text of the Draft Plan "prior to significant development within these special impact areas, detailed analysis of potential traffic considerati-ins should be incorporated into the development plans". 1 The request for increased density is too high! overall residential -areas average density would change from 10.8 du/ac to 12.77 du/ac, or a potential population increase of approximately 2,900 persons. C3. The amount of High Density (25-30 du/ac) proposed (95+ acres or approximately 2,375 units; appears disproportionately large in comparison to the amount of commercial , office, or other res- idential densities proposed. The High Density proposed adjacent to the proposed elementary school may create traffic/pedestrian conflicts and increase \the risk to school children. 9' �v. Planning Commission February 9, 1981 Page 3 The propos�a tends to concentrate density in a relatively small residential area between Foothill , Haven, Church and Rochester, increasing the overall residential area density, on the Sedway/Cooke plan from 11 .4 du/ac to 15.8 du/ac on 280 acres. Commercial designation at the southeast corner of Milliken and Base Line is designed to serve the Planned Communities area; the site at the northeast corner of Base Line and Haven would create long trips and overlap existing service areas of existing centers. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission review and consider the analysis made by Staff on the Lewis Homes request and leave the designations presently shown on the Draft Land Use Plan as is. Respectfully submitted, / 1 / BARRY K. HOGAN City Planner l ■BKH:SM:jr Attachment: Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Correspondence from Lewis Homes � IIIIIII11111111111111 �®i I;I I I•I•I I� I III•i I I�I� � i . . � . • • i I I I I I I I � •, � •I•I•i� - �� II Iilll I I I i • �],.� IIIIII111111!II!I11111 ; •� \ Nl- 000 0.0 :: : _ • •O _ . .Y .•. ... . . . :�_ ::; _ _ _-_ • :: :: a ®� � wig so C =u; •o _ • • e • • ..Y• I I II 11•I :•: :• e o I II i• ,�� j •tea � • ' ~r . ICI I I »::::� ('30 LtJ _ _ •• •1• • 1 1 1 I�1. • I ...i ••� �• .Yi.:' • i•:. NLIJ 10.1 •e.i . • ::. . . .- .. • . - . ,,p : .1 !:•• . :.• L L�i : • � V � � � �ill e_• rl I I I I I I I I- 1 I I � i I Iil I I I I I I . ..� � � � IIlttl;l; ®1;1;I;i; , • , I t I11111111111 I!111711 I 1 Y ° •� �111Y I I',I l l I11 j 11�1�Iy I I - e• • .>� _:�::: '_`d -,;.' it-�-' :' :• ::: '. .... \ IN Im AL Y4:•: :,.,:: M : �� ;:: .�. .. � �:�.�y • ®®®mil Y ..mow: 11 IL :: an• ��V 11 j!1 �w�m � ill t:SV •. •1• '! ..7 � '' eo • :: • • •:::Y..:' :: .� :' •� • •• `.e: V LPNIs HOMES 1156 Noah Mountain Avenue/P.O.Box 670/nplantl,CA 91786/714 985-0971 February 2, 1981 Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga Post Office Sox 793 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Reference: Proposed General Plan Planned Communities Area Gentlemen: During the course of the General Plan hearings, densities have been lowered in many parts of the City in order to preserve the character of existing neighborhoods. We feel it is important that higher density be retained, and expanded, in the center of the City within our Terra Vista project. The three critical reasons are to make afforda7le housing possible, facilitate realization of the City's transit and energy goals, and retain a balance of housing types within the General Plan. The importance of density in furthering these goals is well recognized. It is important to keep in mind that: O Without areas of higher density, most average families w111 be shut out of Rancho Cucamonga. In that event the projected industriat growth so crucial to the City's fiscal health may well not materialize as industries' seek other locations where their employees can afford to live. o Concentrations of homes are needed where major transit routes and trail systems converge in order to make a useable transit system viable. Without them, transit ridership will be low and the result will be more driving, more traffic, more energy consumption, hither commuting costs, and more smog. • A balance of housing types is needed to meet the City's regional responsibilities, to comply with State law, to make the provision of infrastructure and amenities economically feasible, and to provide variety in the community. 1' 1, Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga February 2, 1981 Page 7_ While we understand the desire to maintain low density in neighborhoods where that land use pattern is already established, in our view it would be shortsighted to impose that pattern viere the opportunity exists to improve upon it without disrupting established neighborhoods. In our opinion the logical place to allow higher densities is on the Terra Vista site, which is adjacent to the community center and office employment, as close as possible to the industrial area, at the hub of the transit and trail systems, and separate from existing development.- We therefore request the following charges on the Terra Vista site: • A medium d.enisty area is shown between Milliken and Cleveland, south of Church. We ask that the western portion be redesignated for high density and the eastern portion for medium high density. s We ask that the medium high density designation be continued on the east side of Milliken, behind the commercial area fronting on Foothill. o Finally, in the medium density area north of Foothill and west of Rochester, we feel the portion fronting on Foothill should be redesignated for medium high use. In our opinion this use would be more appropriate as the site is on the Footh111 corridor and adjoins commercial and industrial use. We would also ask that the balance of this medium density area retain that designation rather than the low medium designation recommended by Staff. We feel that a buffer for the existing homes east of Rochester can be more than adequately handled through street treatment and project design. If the Staff recommendation is accepted by the Commission, we would ask that the low medium area be confined to the portion fronting Rochester. We feel these changes will make the land use at the core of the City more appropriate to this central location. It should also be pointed out that our Planned Community rearranges the various densities in reasonably-sized parcels rather than the monolithic blocks shown on the General Plan. In most cases our plan pulls the higher densities inward to interior intersections, thus providing even more separation from existing development. We request two other changes in the land use within the Terra Vista property (aside from the City park) . First, we oppose the Staff recommendation that the park adjoining the school on Rochester at Church be rotated to front on Rochester. This would impair the development of our greenbelt, which we feel will be a greater recreational amenity to the adjoining residents. t, ti Planning Commission City of. Rancho Cucamonga February 2, 1981 Page 3 Secondly, we ask that the neighborhood shopping center shown for the southeast corner of Milliken and Base Line be relocated to the northeast corner of Haven and Base Line. The site at Milliken and Base Line would probably not be developable for several years, because of its isolation and because Milliken as a City arteLial will take years to complete. A center will be needed in the meantime and Haven and Base Line is the log: al location for it. Thank you for considering these requests. Very truly yours, Kay 'Matlock Project Manager KM:gk:2021f �5 1 t--: e b ■ Y {, \ ULJQ Q a. y I 1111 i 1 , I 0 •, :."::•:�:•�: . . . L1t .4'.:U.� ":�j�.�,l��M�.�: � ,�` . ��J.- \ \ I III'I'IlrilllllllffiiJ i Ifi I I I I I I•I•I•I ©•� I I I I'I fill tl I l l l l l l l l l f l l f lilt r'� ■ 4 I r I r r �,Cccc,TTTr...��''' . r , 73 Lu ,� FI : p \ \. \ t ....... ..................... 4y 13 \ t to Y 4 / N \f r \ :hF ,v , 5 ',+r•�r.� � :!!cif:t evi- e o o� ;' \ -•'e• a" S 4�..'_{ilY r' �+�'Mf'1J.Jr�,nGs)r({u" � /'7�,7^'•'`.rn^`.,-r+;—., _^.-.•`�.—�r.f�G. �...,.,•,.�. +�'f . i:"l d �i -Lu. I I I ., I tµ !till 1' •y•l ::fir...�-.'_��T.. � • ' �\r��r• -� . ... .. . . .oil1 '>•�p�JS' r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ��%CAMq,�C' STAFF REPOT r a _ -n z F � Z U ? 1977 DATE: February 9, 1981 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner BY: Steve McCutchan, Associate Planner SUBJECT: REMAINDER OF LAND USE REQUESTS ABSTRACT: The Planning Commission should consider the analysis and recommendation of the following requests. Should the Plamiing Com- mission agree with the recommendations, Staff would request that they take action to approve such changes. Attached are four land use change requests that have been received in recent weeks. Each request includes a cover letter, the correspondence received, and a map showing the parcelization in the immediate area. The following summary is included for your reference: 1 . Norman Carniello, et al : Less than one acre on the northeast corner o Grove an rrov oute. Interim Plan: Low Residential Draft Plan: Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) �^ Request: Commercial The site is in a residential neighborhood; it would be inappropriate to encourage long-term commercial land use at this location. 2. Arnold Anderson: Approximately 39 acres located at the northwest corner of Haven and Arrow Route. Interim Plan: Mixed Use, Medium Residential , Alternative Commercial site Draft Plan: Office, Medium Residential (15-24 du/ac) Request: Industrial Park The Planning Commission has previously received this area when considering a request for office on the northern one-half pf this area. The Commission recommended the office on the frontage of Haven and Foothill and this remainder to be left Medium-High. In addition, the area was to be included in the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Study. Planning Commission February 9, 1961 Page 2 3. Fred Koning: Approximately 5 acres on the southeast corner of Hermosa and 19th Street. Interim Plan: Mixed Use Draft Plan: Low Residential (5-14 du/ac) Request: Office The site is within a residential neighborhood and adjacent to a proposed school site. It would be inappropriate to encourage office designation under these conditions. 4. James D. Chase, AIA, et al : Approximately 6 acres 300 feet nortF of tFi —east of Hermosa. Interim Plan: Mixed Use Draft Plan: Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) Request: Medium Residential (5-14 du/ac) Higher residential densities have been planned west of the site concentrated around the Archibald, 19th, and Foothill Freeway offramp area. This site would extend the higher density areas beyond what would be considered appropriate; Hermosa is intended to be a demarcation line and buffer between medium and low density areas. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should review and discuss the - following requests for changes to the Draft Land Use Plan, considering the analysis made by Staff and have the designation presently shown as IS. Respectfully submitted, BARRY K. HOGAN City Planner BKH:SM:jr Attachments r 11 ¢ 1 it e• w H LL p .l 04 Z LL i 4 0 Adak yb I t �a4 ro II aI p a 3AV Atltl3H �'9 Q la 6l� Z J o Zo Ja or .n J >Il p H O W 2 all r LL p ¢ q F a WII N 4 4 N O moms em�WII q I cl ¢ 2 all ' < w WII V s' Y • all Y+! '3A VQNVMIA nll Sb� 1 1 UY I I N3153H90tl Z = xo It d;93 =m� 2: mow- I II J s 11 0< V n < C, _ II J u J A CZ _ W t I 'NV{4 3H z •� O U � _ _ a Y • ¢EQaM 4 . II r �� 13AV OAIVA3NIA P � ¢ 'z 1 a2 1S NVI'/3NHV9 /��, VONONVJn3 ��3 .F 'a 00 c ' E--4 ram( _ •a � ~ My FI� J m /7S t O > .�..� im 0-4 _ It .S J G a IL wJ rl II 311N3Ab 017J173 Y• _ vi VGItI LUu _ Ours t k•--' _ �•• • •..� 2 DLI/AC COMMEPCIAL LOW iw OFFICE 2-4 DU/AC Foothill •. INDUSTRIAL LOW-MEDIUi1 PARK MEDIUM GENERAL °;: .- •^`:; 5-14 DU IAC ® INGUSTRIAL 10 �= GENERAL INDUS. cc MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED rr • Y ^, • S •. ra % ; 15-24 DU/AC% j HEAVY Af.row " ' ° ° INDUSTRIAL NIGH °•� 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE ' " •' • • ° RESIDENTIAL E COMMERCIAL ,.•..............._ - _ OPEN SPACE COMMUNITY ~ COMMERCIAL "�•--•-.�.._ ,�"'""' _ Q FLOOD CONTROL NEIGHBOHOOD UTILITY CORR. COMMERCIAL INTERIM PLAN COMMERCIAL PLAN Lny-Residpnti a1 Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) REQUEST _�unercial ANALYSIS: The site is in a residential neighborhood; it would be inappropriate to encourage long term commercial land use at this location. RECOMMENDATION: Retain the Draft Land Use Plan designation. r` y: i APPLICANT: Norman Carnielio et al ITEM.- r: LIO L;aw b -1 a vY 84 � 1 —,.—Y-173+L'.. 3dWb1U�QW35-9 _ At 3AV— r;4. •? ,aranw—nurn�s J it— CG ® I O — �� Ow C O I t Q � i O w i le ® w. 1wr P66 ++Ike ID e 'G � O R • ID ' J � ``Q Fii j e ® `t ` t ® 3 9 ; s R • -a, ova w .�' .r o® �. w 1 3AON9 3 zAlbpror7d� Oil(l NORMAN CARNIELLO RICHARD CARNIELLO ARROW and GROVE MARKET & LIQUOR 8114 ARROW HIGHWAY RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA 01730 TCLEPHONC 7 d/i R2-CID.. � . EY L1i.dF I. .r�zz�lft`r/xreZI� t1�`1 mo Ole f�Pvw I9z, x?,n? zc4y, t I KORMAN CARNIELLO RICHARD CARN!ELLO ' ARROW and GROVE MARKET & LIQUOR 8114 ARROW HIGHWAY RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA 91730 TELEPHONE 714/902.-5134 I 1 x �rl� Grliv'�'. 'r1Grl��,�.� C' Cz �� 2 z� eol( - `2 DU/AC COhMERCTAL • •• • •a w '•'•=:% ... -.. w • • • LOW OFFICE . .... — • • w . 4 . . • : w• •:• ®— :• ® r ® INDUSTRIAL ....... 0 LOW-MEDIUM PARK Afth 5-B DU/AC GENERAL •;•;•;•;.; :r•:ru �o MEDIUM ® INDUSTRIAL '. :' •.. • " " _ ••-• rs / C,,.,r.,. / GENERAL ...::: .. . . ••••• r MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED •. .~. . :::•::. :: HEAVY "" •••' HIGH INDUSTRIAL • N 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIPE ::. • ��• . . _ .• RESIDENTIAL - COMME•RCIAL OPEN SPACE ., ::. Jr"K COMMUNITY — • • �+•• � � COMMERCIAL _ ':�• FLOOD CONTROL U •) , ' - d=_ I NEIGHBOHOOD UTILITY CORR. -Jy[•-- -_- ..._._ �. COMMERCIAL INTF4I1 PLAN DRAFT PLAN Mixed Use, Medium Residential Medium-High Residential and Office* REQUEST: Industrial Park ANALYSIS: *The Planning Commission has previously reviewed this area when considering a request for office on the northern half of this area. The Commission recommended the office on the frontage or Haven and Foothill and the remainder to be left Medium- High. In addition, the area was to be included in the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Study. RECOMMENDATION: Retain the existing land use designations and defer to Foothill Boulevard Corridor Study. APPLICANT: Arnold Anderson AP° 206-341-1 ,2,3,4 ITEM NO, 2 ;z j n u { i i N r. v c v RIP e O` s 2 e Ju • � }4 4 �~ —� w3(?N3Atl VaNvol.-: 3waw Cd2�_�' -��'•F'C-}>ii+Nj.4 .t �t ..�:Cy:iM�Y+^•.L': � � . . . f. ARNOLD D. ANDE6RSONMEALTON �:r:�"=?� lel 520 NORTH EUCLID AVENUE•ONTARIO.CALIFORNIA 91762•(714)98"795 r'' I January 29, 1981 Barry Hogan Planning Director Rancho Cucamonga, California RE: Rancho Cucamonga Draft General Plan Dear Barry; Members of my family who can approximately 43 acres at the North West corner of Arrow and Haven have asked me to express their wish to have the General Plan reflect this as an 111 area. At the time they purchased the property, the M1 zoning extended westerly to the flood channel . This still appears to us to be a viable boundry. I would appreciate an opportunity to address this subject at your meeting February 2nd. Yours truly, I4 6n i ADA/dd �. 2 DUU/A I, oc /A C COMMERCIAL College 2 LOW OffICE .m,a. • 2-4 DU/AC �a ::. INDUSTRIAL LOW-MEDIUM ® PARY. • = '" 5-8 DU/AC GENERAL %�=•` ""' MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL •e i•�e .•.y i�iii •wi �• may,•'"' 5-14 DU/AC © GENERAL INDUS. l MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED 15-24 DU/AC HEAVY '�~ ••y '"•" HIGH INDUSTRIAL 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL .: CONIMERCTAL • r OPEN SPACE r •• r. . COMMUNITY ' ' COMMERCIAL FLOOD CONTROL �1 NEIGHBOHOOD UTILITY CORR_ • ' ' j J1 .=•'=,1 COMMERCIAL e- .... ^ INTERIM PLAN DRAFT PLAN Mixed Use Low Residential . 2-4 du/ac) REQUEST: Office. ANALYSIS: The site is within a residential neighborhood and adjacent to a proposed school site. It would be inappropriate to encourage office designation under these conditions. RECOMMENDATION: Retain Draft Land Use Plan designation. APPLICANT: Fred Koning APu 202-201-008 e 3 ITE�� n pan. . „ .,� �. ..� .A..y. ' 'mow { 'aM••'- � „�. aw•�Q'�'d0'� w �...��—�, t�r� �eo`^,.�t g�''it I• .'Ef '�r^�'- •• +a?aR! -tr•�”' F ' . d��. - ;�.. mar : 1• _' `lS7C=;•• �C�. * �.,,�•},��. y .fir �• _ � Y �- 4LY `X�• _.Tn 'nb. NS/O �' fL.�rV� rw C'Y= ••:_�.�n..�.� '•f��•.111 .•1• "'t'��;;�,`_1 'u1�.ogY_7�1�„_,•_HCI••�WY•�tr�• -�T�• . H. , ;. • ''�Y •1 •�•,/�'.•(' t`ff.,� rY/4.JV- r' _•1 J{,. M/�,y f ' t:/.'yYY fw `� " ti k '•t•_t'Y::•I— {qY��'•.J �� vr . t..l�• .r V � Y'n,r'�; ,i^�'.~.1' � k'•- _ •�' r-^•'ZaJ s.T'X� 1!F•• ariw , I�4r +i \�fYre ! .}�13 �. •"� -r ^-r{. t •� F1 - f�'• .la/W q.;��J+/H �.�. 1k c � ' "` /. n � i•. t ��(> �1 ' a• 1�r Y .O � yw�"°l`< •1. ,!' Y`�1.�'��V �.•'IY' � €, h w ':p, ./ S� � 1 t! •�•k.ka • tin•(f':_`.Y .•.� � '" .;ty, .. >� is»• .C�Y6dF fir` •' � - r„ � '• «'.. ... :. -f.. A [TSi :� :� Y t rei ,.. 1!'YW .+ �.• 5' , Y ;',:"''~ b''32T AC. , ia.ri Ac , ,t•r Y J/�, r �M fib. c t ,. r ,. s -- r r .. p r w 5 1' f •'.ply � 1��17�vj�+y.'1r.+1►i �''.,�..,�•{�,': . T �T,,.t- �a � i. .. ^` ..`• - ` ' � 0WC �l CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPP�}z, Anj 9¢sd 5(o►si zy FEB 1981 -two °"�,do s"` 6 7AI y tfn�' o5t AAA FM 019 MR ALTa 4orno il. -7l7oj glgi911Dd�t12olt�03t4o5i6 Feb. )+, 1981 Planning Dept. & Staff Rancho Cucamonga, Calif. Dear Sirs: ' As the owners and residents of the property on the southeast corner of l9th St, and Hermosa Ave. , we are protesting the low density residential -oning proposed in the Pronosed General Plan for the following reasons : 1. 4;e purchased this pronerty less than one year ago and were informed at that time by. the Planning Dept. that it was zoned A-P according to the interim plan and we were not made aware that this zoning would change. 2. Our property is located on a main street of Rancho Cucamonga and the proposed general plan recognizes ® this fact sirce• the properties across the street on the north side of 19th St. are zoned for office buildings and condominiums in both the interim and proposed general plan. We feel that we have been treated unfairly since only our corner was arbitrarily changed to low density residential, which is quite different from the neighboring properties . We understand now that a meeting may have been held earlier this year in order for us to protest this zone charge, but we were not aware of it at the time. This may have been our error due to ignorance of the prooer procedures , and for this we analogise. We do feel that the proposed general plan is doing us a real injustice and we ask that the zoning of the southeast corner of 19th St. and Hermosa be maintained A-P as in the ori- ginal interim plan. Sincerely, �/ / red W. K ning �V Jane C. Koning 2 DU/AC COMMERCIAL LOW OFFICE I•:2o[�Q= e a 2-4 DU/AC "............. �....... LOW-M INDUS7RI.AL ..... .• _ EDIUM PARK . . 5-8 IcLCIa • GENERAL '.:•.•: :.. MEDIUM •; , ".. INDUSTRIAL �• ��••� .� '�' GENERAL INDUS. ' MED. HIGH RAIL SERVED • :�• :.. • •. :� 15-24 OU/AC ilr •• " HEAVY ;rMHIGH INDUSTRIAL :.� 25-30 DU/AC HILLSIDE . :.:: '.:' ....... •, RESIDENTIAL :c►� • ';; '._::. •. ••.' COMMERCIAL ::=:"=:' :!:•... .�� - OPEN SPACE • "•"• . .. .•: COMMUNITY :.: :.y COMMERCIAL FLOOD CONTROL 0 === ' ' :.i NEIGHBOHOOD UTILITY OORR. •. �.......c:f COMMERCIAL . . . .... ........ ............::: .... IN E. PLAii DRAFT PLAN —�P - Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) REQUEST:_ hYarliifm Residential ( -14 du/acj ANALYSIS: Higher residential densities have baen planned west of the site concentrated around the Archibald, 19th, and Foothill Freeway offramp area. This site would extend the higher density areas beyond what would be considered appropriate; Hermosa is intended to be a demarcation line and buffer between medium and low density areas. RECOMMENDATION: Retain Draft Land Use Plan designation. APPLICANT: James D. Chase, AIA, et al AP° 202-191-023 1 S`II ITEM 'NO, 4 ti �' � _�i.a��.F�-=ate' . 'i �� •-- � � � •'. Q w • 4i 1 ..a S. �.� k�Y♦[b- Y i Pf � �r l� o - _ 4 — Oit ac�tz ex. 0:1 Oa�19a�t=,2 i r,t t I M It] I tl1 '� . � .„vim • m71 SOD, P.7R ^Dt rJ•tl� O,l7.iP):- m r .-_. .� - , d �•[L. UIN d .. � � II c ry 'j -� i ��:>r.' hs� � rn � ��.'... • 1- o. '-' r.C�.^ar OL as w 41 � � •®a Qx Ct1a C9x rti� i'�6 w •:Y - Y - r 14 a a 3 a°a :'Iiah•7��1,.t • r. �,-r / ::Y: 'v c. ,r.f -1 a ._ 3 M• 1- b /..~ ♦+�t"f a••0 '� '7tJl.-'-x.°�T�+•1'�3• �Ilr.:.i":�'.rvL�.t wijL.�.es4r•/�i.4':N�'.r:�r�..:.�.Tr/'.ti9e�.'i�si.�S..5...,..,�;�!S�►Y��eUSC�:.- .,�yo February 3, 1981 Mr. Barry K. Hogan, City Planner Community Development Department Planning Division City of Rancho Cucamonga Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Dear Mr. Hogan: The previously published master plan indicated a mixed use zoning for a 6-acre parcel on Hermosa Avenue, starting about 300 feet north of the northeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and 19th Street. The property directly on the northeast corner is zoned A-P. Since the original mixed use zoning allowed apartments, offices and institutions, 'we request that the zoning. for the 6 acres be retained as either office or medium density residential: The. medium density zoning compliments the proposed zoning on the northwest corner of the inter- section and would be a logical and compatible use. Since we could not get in touch with you all day on February 3rd and your letter was only received yesterday, we want to express our concern for a rezoning. u Very truly yours, r MelforAl C. Morgan, All A_ Valteh Siegi, AIA a'. � e, �w o: De y is FAI. James. hose, AIA 500 East "E" Street Ontario, California 91764 i 4. -- OTY OF RAN10-10 CUCA.MONGA soG``C"A1��V�ry STAFF RE, PORT o - IZ UI > DATE: February 9, 1981 1977 TO: Membors of the Planning Commission FROM: Barry K. Hogan, City Planner BY: Steve McCutchan, Associate Planner SUBJECT: FURTHER REVIEW OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OF THE GENERAL PLAN ABSTRACT: The Planning Commission will consider and review the Draft Environmental Impact Report of the General Plan. Public and Commission comments will be incorporated into the Draft document prior to final acceptance. BACY.GROUND: The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) of the General Plan was distributed to the Planning Commission at the January 22 meeting. In addition, the Planning Commission has been provided a' Summary Matrix to the Draft Environmental Impact Report. This matrix identifies poten- tial impacts and mitigation measures that *are proposed in the General Plan. Previously, the Planning Commission reviewed topography, geology, st- s- :sioiogy, land resources, water resources, biology, meterology and air quality, scenic resources; and historic sites. Topics to be discussed at this meeting include population/socio-economic characteristics, land use and zoning, transportation/circulation, noise, parks and recreation: schosis, libraries, law enforcement,' fire protection, and public utilities. v summary of these impacts-and mitigation measures under the topics to be discussed is provided as--an attachment. The page-numbers noted following each mitigation measure indicate the location each mitigation measure can be found in the Draft EIR. Also included for your information is a correspondence from t;;e State Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse verifying the City's compliance with the environmental review .requirements pursuant to CEQA. It further states that no comments were received-on the Draft EIR for the General Plan from.any State agencies. Planning Commission February 9, 1981 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission review and discuss the Draft Environmental Impact Report and potential impacts and mitigation measures as discussed and contained within the following topics: - population/socio-economic characteristics - land use and zoning - transportation/circulation - noise - parks and recreation - schools - libraries - law enforcement - fire protection - public utilities jReApectfully bm:tted, n O Pla B :SM:jr Attachments: Draft EIR Summary Matrix Letter-State Office of Planning & Research State Clearinghouse N• C a T V � y Y O V N N q > 41 N L ¢ a ` N C n O A ' J O V T W 1±� yl rWJ f.' 7 •. z W M C •i T C d .,0. J Y ¢ Y tl q J 7 V O N q j CI Q E L L N w T V S 2 •.YT- O of C T T ✓ Y b� O N b d C •O C O O ••• C Y q C (y L L 8 0 O O m wrr a u„• b e 4- c c .cow to o 0 o d'n cc�o c u r^ ru T t ul'• E t 4- pI d to O JJ Oi C Y.T-t a q Y O C p M L' W C C w L a Y O O c Cli L ,0 mOgq Cr NN+• W OCV 0 o u�u i- IV U LtL- n b o nl c °• w a c+-Y rn i Y o' �I w c o I; T� '' q N C r 01 Y•r A Y w•� p ._ L E L .w In EV nINN 4Y' m.J � NOIY Crc� OJw, L C O WYL-r� 0 Lqq YC_VVw pECI w G'� C YI N w N T O G Y w 6V Or qC NC OrrC �V � Ld LC LV 'I' y a^ ONC OL & � gLTV N a q 0i tti L O d C C O V L. '•r M N w•r N C q+' U' U C C C W • d FME d L LCOT W"- CAdYr •C; c LCmV w Y•r+ L. O O > ro O OYl CO,01 0.1 11 JJ wV 'Rdd x4" LCCa dAL Nb LNb �Y MID q L A w J O.W A•r } L O J u C Y N yL tti Cw� Wpm O.0 Cr CV N OUOL C 00 tT> SILO' LV OL Tr-^tl• q 'U UO L� 'p Lr O.E 'Od o .-oYC ww O d tra mYAE o+- C O cRID 'O > > r LCV Z NY w NO O, aY' NOq Vy pv L+- pUI lc_ wd ASV Y 010yy�I NISOOA O YY OZ = w A >tJ aq Y OITA C`C^ dO. VL ddAU� �0 Z mo= . Mw vY.t AUUW � C •!a q C O, C••• YVO EON L00l1 r u q V Y v m L 0 �� IO I L T q 6 A-r C g O L N N W ¢ Q, L ¢ u 0: A L+- t. ur N Q' mYCr 2¢Y¢ ^ wL.'•Ewr L.rN N•r-V O7Y nV S. dJOJao ¢r CA Ow q C••� 'JY OIY >A U N }�.- 2 w L OI d 'L V mp1� 0 4 m Lp.T y C r O A C•r C 4 w Nd � OCIL C LO LL„V mYr LN N Cy4'- GIN CwwE C_ LVLO. CLL NT LLY = UONwNq qNm NLY d,NwN J = wr » 6 '^Y O,IC Wk > Wd gN �JQ dwNr Olw ?!1 v 'J .Qq bYCgTLL L NC' NO'da qY L-rO r N.0.rLV In Y_ Ow N V q'p d O a•� i Y t.g w L U NY N a 3• T d W O C(T w 1]v.b q W gf. wNC C � NU u' YL nO YYCW iC `V Od .. V.. A O. AOIr > l\' mx 00 0' L.. 11 N Tt v� L• C fl Y V O J W N w J♦V O C l4 'O J q+` O U p' •Y N r O L L r V po w OI W ❑ N•' �'_ ••'� w i,q V Y F S y alc •per O p N • p V ••V O. � Or rL � MIL. U.nl� q p� OAt OL N wYV wa' aZr 010, t1m 1L• L GLNNNO V rd • 01 C b y O Y C 4. f' CrW > A C L Ow•v w-CAC L OILY Cb U >6 .c c�0 wl- ONdut LCL aNCUON A g O M w L A C A L L .0 L G .pG1 y J. w O C Y J O- LL Y d H C'm W ¢ N••• L A C �r t"1 O 6 H 6 O.N W6 t•• N O Y S E. q Y L � W T yP•.- OI N b L O d O CNkC YmtY rnw Y ¢Y�I1 TITW NC V N L•.• Ow V (lb w� E• ymI YLtC_ YwCTT •O OC YC OL C mOI > >r 'A Y = OO Yt O 01 w V m J q N w CW d w C A ;" t U C N C C p eo r L N �L'` d A O C L > •^V V C w O Vm- TL O m O E U W w+• 6 CL NL N ' OIm L•r N. V LQY-r N v pN CC OY G _ Ly O 'pCV Lq Qm1 ? N N L b r W 10 N V •I d C N r m O 01 t LO O � �01 U HlU ^ ww m 0 ff >f U .n C I 1 •YC V- S C Y C Y Y La L L ZNr Y-b �i �h uow = �W cY 'J JR a�Acr u Q m— Y V- N O C C U V A V 6 w O. _V- pI (z� R O ALO L S m r d r O L Y L O d C V- L l V- C C �'rrpp y C 6 Lr Lw - Ep ,Y E �YY Y CNNw OLI �Lwm 06 Lqqa + N _r OVC 0C Xm AU 0 0 q N p V.,_ T.tL• O O 1' pqI L L !J'J w UY NrL 6� QY YE YN.E4 TY 0CC1 TM C N r A w N•^ C+- C 01--•Y_ 6ANY +J NYw YV LrmErll- mb �.jy�Y mlNyp1 6.O,,yCACy O LVJm Yp,O.0 Or Ow O•� J0p1f V- OyN 'O m ,a TL WAY dJ0•, p>p11 0 X , k": C L[1 O U L p>pII V 0>0II L 0011 �L� y>0I 6 W L C yy 4- y01 4. G Y W m Y O N Q V J M O N O O.6 L Y Y 0 0 > l3 L O O C N N ud V Z to Y j Tr 0 f- �gnl.1 N w O W p tY 6 lR W 1O U' VI J s •Q C V N q A S •r N W Y b W W ^ N {♦1 c Y f� O ✓t � Y Y YJ. Y j1 V p 'Ir r1 J � V � 6 d LL V O 1L G 01 4 fI p�I Cp n V r V r y � r��• m F' ff II A 6 }. ��r 4 ��A� C (O�gOV t•^ N (� pw+L Ly� pOY MY YYy LLJ „Y,Ti I^ y6r^Fp'� Yb14^Yr CVNgpgy_ � CVm C YC ¢ Yl'�6 �� rNdO' yO VC Vq f/Y 4qC C^C Cr .C } {-a ti 0A 'J A�UDy L O ON I.YAL.� � {�' Cyf t'::°i`. $ r�P� vi•^�d{y'- •�- ^I > C O.v Op OY ANV V'q Wr iM^ �C yI V V1 Gqq "p�T(ptlL�I�V4 � CL dN•q^ _qY�>CVb L.V.4b� Yp� Sp OCY O' CSi4 Yp� 4hb� �a~ V� 4.Lpq� ^ L� Arm,10 .� V>�J�yj,'i1 � �pWC. V.q WL Jd VyiO MW 60 qYI MMV�i�Wc A{�y 6�1 . �41Yl yYy Oyy pp f.F �• i yypp Cl' 4C.' ,Vyrp S V. O fw a Y A Y ]V.� O.V YL<�A' L.b V I yI 4 G C r W�-� y LN rCyp1CYO A{{{l.. _� GNYVNJyLC` GY YLOC FsP1Y Or L^y�A L O� yqL gL � (OL � �'pO .{. p OCV_QQ�ppb^ _C(fy�yti�pA AIrr i{C�y� V (()Iy9 4 yN Y YY V�L+U S 1Yu 40 �V q W AAy � V 7{pp.�� V W Lryy LN Vp� Yq a� V y�rO 4�r y V OpA� NqEAL P YI YLw yNy4LL t 9T L�V�Vt: tl�ly l4Vu lw CV�N,C1 p4��I1Y4 �CVL LIG WLC_` N^TT`�� YO L�O AV ApAJ NL �Vl v1' YNgMY MWYYOu >bCC+ p6CU YA NgJ40 OY Np4p•n f�j�i %, Y. OO. FL-t' q O N I O �3'r 1 CLww�„C,d C +IO LO_ 4 'J� oL^,rI 4 � IJpTNNL ` LNy N � y� N OpYgN YAY � YM R1y �b Y g4ryV+ yCCV// > VV 4r AL Yi . tVILCyVyC11 C N �OfII�N C W a' N4 fL� Val. 6po�0 Y� 44P dw4i yCyy��pu/� 6 gO9_yLI^ ►�ANV iq L.'r.OPOTI� F�� N �LgLllYL �O �`r� LOVVn LUT y1Y4 OINNL`OLq I�G6VMNa J Yq 7.-4w� V),ylL 1••'YYI^Y. Y•N !J A � T10 yYIF. L y r L V' O Y�V •w' ^ CI ZT• � Y y L b 40.d O Q p > LT Cr L Iw.y yr V�ZV W L� WNyY WOW. Vy!M LO S L C W u L.�L y V YO.L W �L O ~ OA L q ZN�CV AM �r V V RI COT CO N $ =Y ";i.L✓�g LP Ei V w{ •Y+{ CLL 01L^�bJj � LLW TMt yu � NA� I' gLY�N}. L O�t 8 yy Y# y pI r� V�' w•.� � 4 C�q Y V N` �Y + L�A� L�W Y'_OW. b T {q^ py� ^A q py Y,T ^�Ly y2^= yy1.YM LA�iII l �i ggqry A l N : :yy C C L IYi1 i R G,bCV Y t M yC�`T■ YVMWy y Ye�L C.� YOO. M� �r �EC wjL a yy N _4 L5 OR Y y �Y OlL 4O{ ppIIpp 4r yYI� ry VO�{r fOJ 7{yf�,¢pV�ga{.p . pI �y fyI W ry C y �I tTj f� WW CC O O O 04 G«i CMYY O V Oady 1:Yuyi p?w y ^ Y _Gr C Y t sEL gLLg^^1 so4� a l GOVERD MrS OFFICE m OFFICE OF PLAN 41141-0 AND RESEARCH 1400 TI NT4% UTREET SACRAI iENTO 811014 OMUND G. BROWN JR. 'Y Qr !;fiP:GXQ January 30 , 1981 COPLi;alNi Y GE�,LlG"?'7F.i' f DEPT. AM PA! Steve McCutchan ' yg1191111�Z1?121�t� t516 Associate Planner �. City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Sox 307 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: SCH #8004090.1 Rancho Cucamonga General P :an 1980 Dear Mr. McCutchan: The State Clearinghouse sL•bmitied the above listed environmental -document -to selected state age:: =ies for review. The review is complete and none of the state agencies have comments . ::'.his letter verifies your conpli.ance with the environmental review -requirements _of the State .Cle4= Lnghouse pursuant to the Calif (rnia .Environment:al.-Gtuality -kcr. . Whe 7e applicable, however, this s lould not becons.tr;ued as a waiver of any jurisdictional authority �r title lnter.escs .of the .State of California. Thank you for .your cooperation. S i.rcPrely, Stephe Williamson state�. learinghouse ... Ai i I 1 A l i I I -- CITY OF RANTa-10 CUCANIONC.A oc�%C^M°v�+ STAFF REPORT < r AM DATE: February ' 1?81 0 l o TO: Members of the Planning Commission E' z U > FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development L977 SUBJECT: THE PROCESSING OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IN THE JOHN BLAYNEY ALTERNATIVES AREA Please find attached two documents; the first is the original Office of Planning and Research approval letter for Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan extension. The second document is a letter just received from the Office of Planning and Research modifying condition 1-A of the first letter. As you recall , condition i-A stipulates that prior to approval of any devel- opment application during the General Plan process a finding must be made that the project is consistent with both the existing and the proposed General Plan. The intent of the Siate condition modification is to allow the City in those alternative areas the flexibility of proceediiig with development applications if the City Council opts to do so. The reason this matter is before the Planning Commission is that the Lewis Company has filed a number of development applications in the al- ternatives area and in order to process their development applications we need to determine land use in those areas (the area in which these applications .are submitted is the triangular piece from Church all the way to the railroad tracks abutting Deer Creek) . One development appli- cation leaves an area open for a neighborhood shopping center on the northeast corner of Base Line and Haven. As you recall , the City Council denied the location of such a center on the southeast corner last year. Evdluation of the tract cannot proceed without a determination whether there will or will not be a neighborhoods center at this location. Since the Planning Commission will be making final recommendations on the Plan- ned Communities area, it would seem aF-ropriate that the Commission also make a recommendation to the City Council whether t:�ese development ap- plications should proceed. The City Council , of course, is the final decision authority. But at least the Council will have had knowledge that the Planning Commission has considered the alternatives area and has recommendations fog the area. This same item will be agendized for the City Council meeting of February 18, 1981 . Resp I ctpypful s bmitted, JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL:jk Attach. o�g of (falif� GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET 00 SACRAMENTO 95814 EDMUND G. SkOWN JR. (916) 322-2318 1 , hA 7_. . .. January 20, 1981 Mr. Jack Lam Planning Director City of Rancho Cucamonga Post Office Box 793 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Dear Mr. Lam: Recently, our staffs have discussed interpret?t;zLis of the OPR's general plan extension conditi.ous. Specifically, I understand that the interim General Plan does not provide any planning poli- cies for the development of some areas of the City. Conse- quently, when development is proposed in those areas, the City would be unable to make the finding required by extension condition la: consistency with the existing plan. At the time OPR set the extension conditions, my staff was not aware of the interim plans . deficiency. I am satisfied that the remaining conditions will effectively promote the planning interests of the City and those set forth by the Legislature. It would be ccntrary to the Legislature's intent to administer the extension conditions in a manner to unreasonably screen projects from consideration. Therefore, if the City Council concurs, I will modify my letter of November 5, 1980, to add the following new condition: Where the existing General Plan dces not contain any adopted land use policy, the City Council shall substitute the following finding for finding la: There is reasonable probability that the land use pro- posed by a tentative subdivision map, parcel map, zone change, or land use permit will be consistenL with the proposed general plan. Conditions lb and lc will still apply. I feel that this proposed modification is consistent with provi- sions of state law since it is based on the statute's provisions for newly—incorporated cities (Government Code Section 65302,5). ;7 �$to b of &I faaxaiax GOVERNOR'S OFFICE �m OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH w 1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO 95614 EDMUND G. BROWN in. GOVERNOR ` ;\/ 1�/. �1 C OF rf� "IT CUCA fViGP;GA COPE.M411T'f DEVII0MITNT DEPT, November 5, 1980 AfLI PM Mr. Jack Lam 4ate;Y110,11112?21293141516 Director of Community Development City of Rancho Cucamonga Post Office P.ox 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear ?'r. Lam: I am pleased to inform you that I have approved your request for an exten- sion of time for the adoption of the Land Use, Circulation, Housinp, Conser- vation, Open Space, Seismic Safety, 'Noise, Scenic Highwav, and Safety Elciments of the City of Rraf,chc) Cucamonga General 'Plan. The extension, as provided in Government Code Sectaur F[302.6(d) , provides the Citv immunity from lawsuits raising. the issue of whether the Ci`v has adopted ar. ade- quate general plan. This extension is wanted from receipt of this letter until N4-ay 3, 1C+81, or the adoption of the elements, whichever is earlier. This extension waives the r._.iuirements of Government Code Sections 65302, 65563, 65567, 65860, 65910, 66473.5, 66474fa) , or 66474(b) only for those land use decisions made after the effective date of this extension. In granting this extension, I note the findi.n.r•, made by the City Council that the followine reasons exist as the basis for the pranting of an exten- sion as specified in Government Code Section 65302.6(a) : WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, since its incorporation has proceeded diligently towards the adoption of all mandatory elements to the comprehensive General Plan by the adoption of interim elements of the General Plan including Land Use, Circulation, Public Facilities, and Recrea- tion, and by the near completion of the draft General Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, contracted services with the professional planning firm of Sedway/Cocl�e, to comps-te all elements to the General Plan including the Land Use, Circulation, Housing*, Conservation, Oven Space, Seismic Safety, Noise, Scenic Highway, Safety, and the option- al elements of Recreation, Community Design, and Energy; and, WPEPEAS, the contract for services with the professional planning cons0tant firm of Sedway/Cooke, set forth the timetable for adoption rf all elements of tl;e General Plan within the prescribed time alLr.:eci u -:,er California State Government Code Section 653^2.5, but the consultant firr^ was forced to extend the necessary time to complete the rernaini.np work on the draft plan. s.' fit,•�:. Mr. Jack Lam -2- January 20, 1981 Further, it will pruvide the City necessary flexibility without prejudicing the General Plan. Please let me know if the City Council finds my proposal acceptable. If so, 1 will formally issue the new condition. Sincerely, Deni Greene Director DG:kv cc: Assemblyman Jim Cramer Assemblyman Terry Goggin Senator Ruben Ayala i r. Jack Lam -2- P!overnbcr 5, 1980 !' Under the authority nranted by Government Coc,r_ Section (15302.6(e) , 1 have determined that the following conditions are necessarv, nendine adoption of a complete and adequate plan, to ensure full compliance with the State Planning and Zoning Law: 1. Mo tentative subdivision map, parcel rr.ap, zone change, or land use permit shall be approved, unless the City Council finds, based upon substantial evidence in the record, that the proposed action is consis- tant with the goals, policies, and objectives of: t' a. the existing General Plan adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and, b. all applicable draft general -plan elements, following its submis- sion to the planning commission for public hearing; and, C. the Growth Ctanapement Ordinance of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 2. The City Council shall not amend existinp elements of the General Plan except to adopt new and revised general plan elements pursuant to the work ;roprarri submitted to OFF as part of the extension request. 3. Residential projects will be encouraged which are consistent with the goals and policies of the Housing Element to provide affordable housing. 4. The City Council may process and approve building permits, vari- ances, certificates for legal lots, and any other ministerial permits, according to City standards, provided that any underlying discre- tionary approval has not been chall.-oged. 5. Within 30 days of the effective date of this extension, the City shall notify the Office of Planning, and Research and the Department of Housing and Community Development of the Citv's decision to adopt the Housing, Element pursuant to the llousin.g. Element Guidelines of 1977 or Article 10.E of the Government Code as provided for in Chapter 1143 of the Statutes of 1980. 6. The Office of Planning and Research reserves the authority to enforce any violations of the terms of this extension. 7. The City shall submit to the State Clearinghouse of the Office of Planning and Research and the Department of Ilousinp and Community Development the draft Housing. T'.lement ninety (90) days prior to consi.- deration by the City Council for adoption. All other draft elements and the draft environmental documents pertaininc to the General Plan shall be submitted to the State Clearinghouse of the Office of Plan- ning and Research for review and comment no less than forty-five (L5) clays prior to consideration by the Planning Commission for adoption. "r. Jack Lam -?- 'dovemher 5, 111Fd 1w If you have any questions or need assistance in any matter pertaining to either the extension or your General Plan, please contact Steve P.ikala (1116/322-6312) or Rill Abbott (916/L/.5-1111 ), Sin rely, Dent Greene Director DG:k y cc: City Council Senator Ruben Ayala Assemblyman T'crry Gorcin Asser.:blyr.:an Rill }'cVitti.e AlMk i'. :i r t. f1%