No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982/12/09 - Agenda Packetr L 11 1111 i. 1 hour, 30 min. (3!.'Y OF RA.i UiO CLEAMO?ti'GA A:FoDA �TG 1T1�'�L P THURSDAY DECEMBER 9, 1982 LION'S PA'tn C T1:ITY CEL'Tt 9161 W S LLRE, C &O-QM41 ,`i 7:00 P.M-- CALIFORY.IA TOPICS:_ Etiwanda Specific Plan: o Lard Use Issues o Draft Environmental Impact Report o Regulatory Provisions MEET1'NG OBJECTIVES: • Complete preliminary Lard Use revisions • Public review of Draft Environmental lmoact Report • Begin re:,iew of Part II of the Specific Plan, Regulatory Provisions I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call Commissioner Barker Commissioner RemDel_ Commissioner King _ Commissioner Stout Commissioner McNiel III. Announcements Purpose of Tonight's Meeting IV. Land Use a. Staff will review last meeting's Commission actions in general, and will recommend specific Land Use District boundaries- Residentiai- ER 7istrict Boundaries - Land use along East, north of railroad .• Land Oise along Miller, at East Avenue 0. Planning Commission Agenda December 9, 1982 Page 2 Commercial Base Line and East - Neighborhood Commercial at Foothill and East - Convenience Commercial at 24th and East b. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to consider individual requests for Land Use changes. COMMISSION ACTION REQUIRED: - Adoption of a Preliminary Land Use Map 60 minutes V. Draft Environmental Impact Report 30 minutes Vi. V a. Staff will present an overview of the Draft EIR and M outline the purpose and organization of the document. b. Staff will note those key mitigation measures recom- mended in the Draft EIR which may affect the Specific Plan, and request Commission direction on the issue of potential RouiL 30 Freeway access. c. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to consider public comments on the Draft EIR. COMMISSION ACTION REQUIRED: - Direction regarding Route 30 Freeway access. Part Ii of `,pecific Plan, Requlatory Provisions a. Staff will briefly overview the function, organization, and the key elements of Part II, and will answer questions from the Commission. b. Public comments and input. COMMISSION ACTIOk REiRED: - None necessary at this time. lu E G VII. Adjourrinent The Planning Commission Regulations that set an If items go beyond that only with the consent o Planning Commission Agenda December S, 111 Page 3 has adopted '1dm-nistrative 11 p.m. adjournment time. tiri.rz, they stall be heard F tiie Commissi.-3n. Note: The next re7ulariy scheduled meeting of the Planning Com- Ossion will be January 13, 1983, and will include further review of the Draft Etiwanda Specific P ?an. El C171r OF RANCHO 4a;UC_A.iMONCA MAEMORANDUM C"T: neember o_ a2 .E TO: w` :ors of the Planning Commission, FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Otto Kroutil, Associate Planner i i SUBJECT: DECEMBER 9, I982 ETIWANDA_SPECI2HI PLAN MEETING MEETING PURPOSE: A. Wra U Preliminar Land Use finish ast meeting s IdnU use actions - Consider individual land use requests B. Begin Review of Draft EIR - Consider Route 30 access - Take public input C. Begin Review - Take public comments ATTACHED MATERIALS: Attached you will find background information dealing with specific topic:: on tonight's agenda. The materials are keyed to the agenda by item numbers, and are organized as follows: ;tem IV: Land Use o Staff paper and recommendations on specific residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. o Maps, with comments and recommendations - Item V: Draft ETR o Staff paper outlining purpose, function, and key elements of the EIR. o Summary of the Draft EIR (your full copy of the Drafk EIR is attached I separately). o Staff paper on Route 30 access. 11 ki, 1 r iii 1 777 � J 11 ki, 1 r iii 1 d. !Ai \� ITEM :Y: LAND USE Res i dent i al At Vie maeting of November 18, 1932, the Commission requested a number of chances in the i_and Use Map recommended by the Advisory Committee. Figures IV -1 through I� -3 indicate the extent of these revisions. 0 -through iute that the total number of dwellirgs was reduced as follows: Advisory Committee Flan 4,740 - 9,301 OU's on 1,914 acres Commission Revisions 3,584 - 7,081 DU's on 1,821 acres 4owewar, the changes requested by the Commission were general and did not folloq ail s,^-ecific lot lines. The following series of maps, Figures IV -4 through IV -% details the areas in question. and t•2ch map contains a brief description, or staff reccurw ndation. RECONN- D::'AT14N: it is recommended that the Commission consider the following map.: —rrd s- a -f—recorz .lend.ations. 24 rn o i �i J C' 0 Y� V' N cc LAND USE Parks (pj Residential (ES,V1-,LoLM,M) Commercial (CC,FC,GC,NC) Open Space (os) (Existing Schools (Ej,H) Proposed Schools (e,i,h) Office/Professional(op) (AND USE DISTRICTS OF zs TM STR CC ��i �— V L VL -- �: �� OS VL `�S VL ���VO.. I � bL � � � YL_ii �4 ER VL FC I� os II VL 1Vi. I I VL VL / C� h I i.Fj 30I ltlG14ArID AVE 1� Vt P e H OS aCTORIA VL ARK LA J j(1I VL L / U��U U I) 1 e M ✓� LAND USE LM LM I r° I Parks(P) LM 1 Residential (ER,VL.,L,LMyM) -Y?AU. R AVE, OP r� I CC ��. GC NC) LM a , i C ®nnrrterC�al ( , P Open Space (os) M �" E :istins Schools (E,J,H) —� FO°TLLMV ' Proposed Schools(e,i,h) Office/Professional(OP) _ ' (iiiie 9 W"nt �;' >! II LAND USE o sl' O DISTRICTS to . S 2� R i jl E� t; Density Low Range High Buildable Residential Acreage Subarea 1 1326 2653 1057 2 1719 cl s' fi. Et:wanda Advisory Committee Plan_ Density Low Range High Buildable Residential Acreage Subarea 1 1326 2653 1057 2 1719 3353 560 3 1693 3294 296 Planning Conenission Revisions Nov. 18,'82 Subarea 1 968 1937 1057 2 1431 2804 557 3 1184 2339 206 LAWN: NDA V4 j S 1 �- IY.T 9--3 n COMMENT: Existing 112 acre lots would be difticult to develop under ER (1 acre) standards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Move VL /ER boundary up to Sum-it Avenue. LJ • 27 • Gommis�lor. tort o-P 19 18 =t 708L1:>�Iig5Lim COMMENT: 660' wide strip of VL may be difficult to deveioo in an imaginative fashion di-e to circulation /land use constraints. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Consider alternatives on following 2 maps. 9 3r., E ,I R i' 43 i - i -- E Lu Ca _. � ; r -r t. J7i ➢liHt911111111ej��numuuoasac � Op COWENT: LIM desiccation at Miller and East intended to be compatible with single family ho -mes_ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Maintain t -M at Miller and East; consider increase to M on south side of Miller, east of Etiwanda. ��pl Commercial With the removal of the Bypass Road from the Specific Plan, the Bypass /Highland location is obviously inappropriate for a commercial center. As a result, the Commission selected the intersection of Base Line and East as an alternate location. Figures IV -9 `h -ougr indicate the general vicinity of East Avenue and Base Line. Because of the freeway and freeway access arrangements, there appears to be only two logical sites for a neighborhood shopping center. a. North Side of Base Line, West of East Avenue Characteristics: Portion undeveloped, portion in use as a commercial nursery. Limited number of property owners. Access off Base Line; secondary access to East Avenue possible. b. South Side of Base Line, West of East Avenue Characteristics: Entirely undeveloped, view of site from freeway. Limited number of property owners. Access off Base Lire only. In addition, there is a 1.8 acre site locatad at the immediate northwest corner of East and Base Line. Because of the physical access restrictions caused by the Freeway offramp, this particular site does not appear suitable for any development other than a service station, or a similar auto - oriented use. (Though never built, a service station had been approved by the City on this site at one time-) RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended that the Commission select a specific site for a Neighborhood Co:irierciai center in the vicinity of Base Lire and East Avenue. 0 11 E e:�2wv6igJIE 26 7H ncxun JIVE MMA ARK L I 7 r i � \ i! ; ! -"�\ i ■ EIGHmORHO®D ` SOPPING CENTERS Proposed in Efiwanda Planning Area ' Approved 'outside of Ebwanda Planning Area 0#104 9 ON E,? � C 10 A-C. , °J3.S.G 7�y i :� t7 ia -Ftl I e, FI AK- C-1 Vl- t6 , A�4 /Ile Iv: IT - i:�: Z-V i. 1 �Y t�.. � ' �. �. �� • ':'� i .; .__ �. �. �' p rr r f�e r' �l�.J �. 1 �:_a � :.) .. - / �/ r i r � 0 Industrial At th_ last Commission meeting, the Connission recommended that the area south of Foothill be designated for light industrial uses. Figure IV -13 indicates the area in question. RECOMMENDATI ©N: Since the Etiwanla Specific Flan contains no industrial regulations, it is recommended that the Plan boundaries be modified to a -ciude the land to be designated for industrial uses. It is further recommended that the area be annexed into the Industrial Specific Plan b -I. daries. 0 fRnS' ;�_y. Rm Q ev COMr4ENT: Etiwanda Specific Plan contains no industrial regulations. STAFF RECOKMENDATION: Area south of Foothill and existing tract should be annexed into the Industrial Specific Plan jurisdiction. E 13 C-1 WAq.or..rf .t J' .�- .,.. �. ��: . �: ��� � �' ^� °` ;� .� ,- � __ �.. ,, ,.,. f ; �,�; II , � tI .1;1 � / .�V. i. � •. 11 ITEM V: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Pur oae of EIF The purpose of the Draft Environmental Impact Report is to present unbiased informat ion to decisionmakers about environmental effects related to the draft yea is related to probable Specific Plan. Information prese���� le events (impacts) „; *s which could or would occur if the Plan were adopted. In au.,....Oc_ the impact report identifies and outlines various alternatives to the proposed Specific Plan which are intended to illustrate the reason(s) why each alternative was not chosen. It should be noted that the Draft EIR was prepared to address impacts of the draft Plan as rELcii-,:cndod by the Advisory Committee. Consequently, changes in the Specific Plan will necessitate changes in the impact report. Or,anization of EIR The Etiwanda Draft EIR is organized into five chapters: Cha ter 1, Introduction apter One briefly describes the purpose of the document, its authority and scope, ar.d to the process and methodology used to analyze various environmental characteristics. Cha ter 2 Project Descri tion hapter Two outlines the Etiwanda plannir:g area location and regional setting, in addition to desribing the Plan's purpose. This section also describes the evolution of the Specific Plan (its General Plan inception as a document designed to b2 sensitive to the needs of Etiwanda) and includes a brief outline of the various contents of that document. Chapter Three describes: I the environmental setting; (2) potential impacts; and, (3) mitigation measures in relation to the following environmental factors: o soils and geology o hydrology o biota o socio /economics o lane use 11 • transportation /circulation • cultural: resources • health and safety o aesthetics o utilities and public services Chapter 4, Significant Effects Chapter Four outlines impacts which may be significant or unavoidable based upon the mitigation measures which will ultimately be incorporated into the Plan. In addition, the chapter identifies those impacts which, while not significant alone, may collectively cause cumulative impacts. Lastly, Chapter Four outlines irreversible commitments of resources (land and community services), and also addresses the growth inducing effects which are influenced by the Plan. -rester 5, Alternatives iisa A"ei'na'' veb beciiun is designed to briefly describe the carious alternatives (no project, Etiwanda Specific Plan without the bypass road, lower and higher intansitt land uses) and to note potential impacts while chacterizing the reasons why each alternative was not chosen. In addition, this section is intended to provide the public with a realistic comparison of the alternatives in order that informed decisions can be made. Key Elements of the Draft EIR Attached for your information is a summary of the key components of .:he Draft EIR. These include: Potential Impacts Mitigation Measures (those recommended for inclusion in the Specific Plan are identified in bold print) Unavoidable Impacts One of the key issues identified in the Draft EIR is the question of the Route 30 acrEss. The following report outlines the options. COMMISSIIN ACTION REQUIRED: It is requested that the Commission hold a public hearing on the Draft EIR, and provide staff with direction regarding Route 30 access in Etiwanda. u 40 11 CITY OF R -ANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: December 7, 1482 TO: Gtto Kroutil, Associate Planner ' FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: East Avenue -Route 30 Interchange As you requested, the Engineering Staff has reviewed the imrr', of including an interchange at East Avenue in the Etiwanda Specific Plan are in the +..,r ti.__� _ process OT GO 1119 6 UCLCIICU a�ie lys 15 tared vu Luc vuu.._a+v• uuu :�� revisions and hope to have a more quantitative analysis to present at the December 7 meetiliy. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS A general analysis of these alternatives were presented as Alternative 1 and 2 included in the Environmental Impact Report (see attached projections). Alternative 1 analyzes the General Plan land uses with the interchange and Alternative 2 the Original Specific Plan without the proposed by -past road. Review of these figures indicates that inclusion of the interchange wi'l marginally increase traffic along East Avenue but would not require a further upgrade in the width of the proposed four lane section. By providing access to the freewa, some circuity of travel would be eliminated and traffic along Highland Avenue would be reduced to a level which could be accommodated with a two lane collector facility. Under the current plan, an additional northerly frontage road to the freeway or other comparable local road network will be required to provide for east -west movement to the Day Creek interchange. LAND USE CINSIDERATION Inclusion, of the interchange at East Avenue would likely produce pressures ti develop lands adjacent to the ramp for freeway oriented uses. This interchange would be the final exit prior to merging with Interstate 15 leading to Las 'Degas and the desert communities. It could possibly tend to develop significant freeway service type activities and introduce freeway oriented traffic onto East Avenue in the ton.. lity. The magnitude of this impact in terms of traffic and community character are incapable of prediction'but these pressures should be considered in the decision process. RWH 30 CMRIDOR sliloy The Commission should be aware that the Route 30 Group fs in the process of retaining a consultant to develop an Implementation P:an for the = onstruction of a facility within the corrid-r. As a part of this study, the type of facility will be reviewed through each community to determine whether the facility should be an arterial, parkway or full freeway and where interchange locations may be apropriate. This study will begin after the Tirst of �.he year and is scheduled for completion in August of next year. Review of the Route 30 Group will lend a regional perspective to the issue and will likely add to the current decision process. LBH:jaa Attachment n U 11 n zs TH ® 's 6' 21,00 �t boc 1 °t 6 oo 8 3 !PIP z - - G � RR 1 i BLVD. wW, g o'' < Y' S' ie r Soo ` r 0 0 N 0 Z 3, 700 rn li c U7.. Ti 0 Y: V 1 4,000 M s title figure ALTEFiN ATIVE 2 5.3 -5 Traffic: Volumes A J G C F C G ri 7 Z 7 G L' z O G � wg `v o � � 9 7 L� m E9Jmc: = a m m m .3I -tea- 3Nc Loop sa G` d O W =m u V O ¢ flow d ]0 C C V rJ p O OTC »cNr �EI'o 2 S S 0 .Ei pa c o oI� m O O. E = � m 30 M- 0 13 ° V 7r O C 1 �v SQ•O� v �1?C'NC obi c 0 0.2 3 = F m so =a.-c y sO v a9 o e m 9 U m F O L d_ 3 � c o m :pp•$� sv 2 � 21= .e V U V a7�,m„ pZ C soft 'J U _ o _ c 0 m - �f� vpa u _ aD `lm_ � wg `v o � � 9 7 L� m E9Jmc: = a m m m .3I -tea- 3Nc Loop sa G` d O W =m u V O ¢ flow d ]0 C C V rJ p O OTC »cNr �EI'o 2 S S 0 .Ei pa c o oI� m O O. E = � m 30 M- 0 13 ° V 7r O C 1 �v SQ•O� v �1?C'NC obi c 0 0.2 3 = F m so =a.-c y sO v a9 o e m 9 U m F O L d_ 3 � c o m :pp•$� sv c n 3 2 � 21= .e V U V a7�,m„ pZ C soft m 0 m - �f� u _ U 0.2 c n 3 2 � T soft c n 3 Y :J G L G G Z r .1 G. C Z 7 G Z� U C F 7 J q Z; n m _ _ O %Iy��0� -3�N r CO TT`O X91 - ul� 1 C %T1r�U O- LOiG„v��.U...UrOO� -- — 'C � E;u iV az WOE 0 O�L ppm % Z; zi _ =u�.., o .�•- V. a ___ ° u m° a� -:+ _Q 'n V C C m � = O yue, � `I 1 w� G_ 9 a V Z 6 tl 0 O to < d Z tl C V a J C � y U < i � T G N V V < � V y c u _ = e s .^ O v o u = u� c = N .y O � V Ya acym %Xlg .g= = o U J O C y m U V J � G V m ^ O � ; Y. V ° � G V� ri �on< m ° Y� r Q v 7t2 �Ca= c ** J m C m Y fp J ea u h z - zEyazom 6w�•��m72 6Cd ;y��i tog V C yY t ^ p9 n Cr c u ` V V V r y 6 O O^J LO$ of 3�o O . m c x m o m o o u m O m V 6 U V 9 T T� mL 0 m m J G O _ G J J °c e � J JN J�� o � _ J - � a ° U U J '-+ < r Z= < V = � r O ° O D O Z— 7; q m i E.� V� p2-:2VS - SS E ?E_ I -'i YmC CL 3q �o am d. " OmuE a_u`$a [it °'�.. =Y' -� iC=• ....7 CL Om —VOO . -•o��. !-rC' =� �CgOV M �.007 mY s �az3��c� E':� '° = •cam _'s=ue " -uq_m Em c S c a Gm'. n> o 013�'•gti iGUGCG.� •_ co.°. p a .G. =�3e - - u E $ c e a c < = m U < 72 A ...• _- r i U 0 O V m U z m C C � C =i�Z►i -C r; xe Sri � § $ \ ! ) � v § 7797 /� \) \ }0 \ \ \k} »!!,2 � /\\ !4o |za %195 !!! }! \ §a!} /;�, -2 E7 ��{#�� \ � =0 /()\ t® =7� -■ 0 7777( \ \ \ \� =Om z ) ;v G]§ 3k| 22 «IB 7797 /� \) \ }0 \ \ \k} »!!,2 � /\\ !4o |za %195 !!! }! \ §a!} /;�, -2 E7 ��{#�� \ � =0 /()\ t® =7� -■ 0 7777( \ \ \ \� =Om z ) ;v }{ - \ � V G u _ ^ = c x ' i C 9 T 1 _ � � y o Z a G ^J a > C Z a G = o � 2 pp oo �• .> p C y y U U V V J_ Si ;5y uL_u w._ U =$ E °oc wEv cF c�icc= _ =ccu_ acv _ y�c y EGpo Gm_ ccm 20 o c a � my op, cr O C n c y C G _ C J O V a a Lr &I Er' UEM VI: PART II OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN, REGULATORY PROVISIONS Part II, Regulatory Provisions carries out the policies and concepts of Part i. It consists of: Chapter 52 Standards and Regulations, is designed to stand on its own in that it contains a substantia portion of what a person needs to know in order to submit a development proposal in Etiwanda, including detailed development standards. In substantial part, this chapter replaces existing zoning regulations for the Etiwanda area. In order to make this material easier to work with, the standards and regulations are grouped in several distinct parts: Part 5.2 Contains information dealing with the specific project site or lot and answers questions about permitted land uses, lot sizes, setbacks, open space requirements, etc. Part 5.3 Deals with questions relating to the circulation system, such as street dedications and improvements, trails, access restrictions, streetscape design, etc. Part 5.4 Covers specific regulations, such as windbreaks, architectural guidelines, parks, and similar topics. Part 5.5 Notes the needs of other agencies, such as public utilities, schools, the ire istrict, and other services. Chapter 6, Implementation, contains a description of now the provisions of the Plan may be implemented. Part II of the Plan, Regulatory Provisions, is intended to be used on an every day basis to answer questions about specific development standards and requirements. However, to fully understand the intent and scope of these provisions, Part I, Policy and Conceptual Plan, needs to be consulted. RECOKMENDATIONS: It is recommended that the Commission hold a public hearing on Part II of the Plan in order to uncover areas of public concern. However, no action is necessary at this time. 11