The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1983/08/16 - Agenda Packetrl Y 4 n l .r yh,.. ie^ I L, N • -jr t• ac- •f I - h. . .N I II n�l'1 • a rl 1 . L I�I TABLa 4.9—F — LAND USE CONFUCPS t hand Use Conflicts Tftis Matns 51a.s tfK ioafltits � I v.,ih are likely to arse Detwecn tans Uses. ConNi c', The ie oust Ot Citfty mitigated or avaiGeC. U I vNi U G� J�GdC+'dd Land Uses _ f—� Genf pril.JG-V ! q ex _ .� cccess L t I - Reslden-.Gl ^'t� Cil G d X SG er,✓ t Lo.ti Dens ly _��-- 0 I``/' \ oder'Te i` i • I G I C' �er1SiTv ph Dens!T'y' �I n iLn J C L9 nSI;T.:TiG nG'. I- e� I. -A I -.. !7• 1 � U O G I .y Ccr^me'CIC! -: ` ndusTr.Gl -- �� 1 88-5 f Ll E FROV1: BY: SUBJECT: Clgy OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEM1®RANDUITA 1983 the Planning ComnissiOn Rick Gomez, City Planner ' B.?q Coleman, Associate Planner RESI_ pE�Ai/GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW PROCESS res dentialhdevalopment explains pres2ntea 7in2Cnapters behind 3the andre�ofwthe Draftfor Developmens code. The proposed review process is intended to: (1) replace the existing cumbersome, multi- layered review process; (2) provide a means for retaining the essential noiicies of the 'Growth Management system that will e41��mDlement4 General tplanlgoals hand anplication /review process; policies; and (5) respond to public input regarding neighborhoo� compatibility. ASSUMPTIONS: The review process is based upon several assumptions regarding the land development process in Rancho Cucamonga: 1. Site design., land use and architecturzi design are critical to all development. eview process is unnecessarily cumbersome, 2. The current applicat60131r redundant, and confussing to developers- land uses 3. Certain lard use can be made compatible with neighboring through careful design and buffering. 4. The city should implement important General Plan goals through an incentive progran. 5. Nigher density (i.e. development at the upper end en the General P-an density ranges) can be an incentive f;-- r, which to incorporate measures that address larger community otherwise might be ignored, such as open space and recreational amenities. 5. Both the public and developers can benefit from a more predictable, yet flexible regulatory process. Residential / Growth Management Process September 6, 1983 Page 2 11 REASONS FOR CHANGING EXISTING REGULATIONS: The ecisting Growth Management Ordinance was successful in preventing disastrous growth patterns. Pbwever, the residential assessment system, specifically the point rating system, has not adequately aridressed the areas of architectural design or neighborhood compatibity. Further, the planned development regulaticns in the Interim Zoning Ordirance are, at best, vague and contradictory. Therefore, there are sextral weaknesses in our current regulations and review process as descril -ed in detail below. 1. While the prior planned development ordinancf! permitted the developer more creativity and flexibility th;.n the strict application of the traditional zoning and sulidivision regulations, the density of residential areas and allowable uses were bound by rigid and arbitrary limits that did not always reflect the capacity of the site and neighborhood. Most residential proposals have been submitted at the top of the allowable density range under the General Plan. Under the new review process, the maximum denist1 depends on the overall design quality and performance of the site plan and its location relative to criteria which reflect factors important to neighborhowl compatibility and City form. 2.. Traditional development regulations tend to foster a "what it takes to get by" level of creativity in project design. The planned development and growth management ur.,,,......... ;.•�••�� incentive or reward for excellent design and creativity. Beyond the minimum levels of performance, the new review process and development standards will require a high level of design to insure npighborhood quality and compatibility. The basic and optional development standards contained in Chapter 4 offer the developer considerable flexibility to choose how to respond to a variety of performance - oriented design criteria to achieve approval. Thus, while a higher level of design is required from the developer, it is matched by increased density and flexibili`_y. 3. A frequent complaint cited by both developers and citizens alike was that the prior review process was unclear and inconsistently applied. Using the absolute policies, standards and criteria contained in Chapter 4 in the review of each project can help reduce differences and evaluations from staff member to staff member. Consistency in measures and terminology can also make it easy to compare data from different development proposals. The explicit listing of criteria used in evaluation of each project and the repeated use of these criteria should help all parties better understand the basis for decision making in advance. The emphasis on end impacts from the citizen's view helps ensure the relevancy of the evaluation. Finally, a clear, more precise set of criteria should help decision makers explain and defend decisions by demonstrating that a thorough, rational, fair and consistent approach was used. 40 l Residential /Growth management Process September 6, 1983 f Page 3 G. The prior approach to development review often overlooked some significant and adverse impacts. Conventional zoning does not always contain the performance n2Wa�dncesst9sp that cmajor o ,mPactsaare owners. The advantage identified at the beginning of the process. Besides helping to assure that the large° impacts are not overlooked, the review process helps identify0 esspl viousbbut no l ss important impacts by requiring all aspects 5. The conventional zoning system for ityregulating ing land hasdalwaysminvolved often been accused of unpredictability. 9 two conflicting interests - the neighboring land owner who wants the property to remain vacant or at a lower or identical intensity t;, his, and a developer who wants a higher intensity use. The City Cou inter review prevail. The srules aof zoningudolnoteallowRmuch se latitude for compromise. The new review process includes extensive design factors to ensure neighborhood compatibil ity. gets his protection; the developer will get his profit. 6_ Finally, a major reason why conventional zoning has failed to come to grips with land use planning is the requirem_nt that all land within the City Limits be zoned. What has occurregriculturallin is that land has been zoned for very low dper's or agricultural spite of both the City's and the developer's full knowledge that a change in zoning will be requested as development Pressure increases. This use of "holding zones" casts suspicion on both the real purpose of the zone and the Zoning Ordinance an a whole This has led to further comp��ations; as poop densit areas, pressures are created to maintain be bestssuitedsfor that density, regardless of what the areas needs. terms of the City's overall plans and needs. With the landtwillobe the Development Code and the Development District Map, rezoned in accordance with the General Plan land use designations as required by State law for consistency. AUTHORITY: The authority h three-fold set of review and a eresi en tial /g rowthmanagementreviewprocessis found in the City's adopted General PlangatfieCsystemnis found Stn atheUemPlemento ionlof,thee General Plan, page 295, which states- 'Where appropriate, the City should consider revising the Growth Management point allocations to include some of the guidelines specified in the plan. in particular, the olicies� taf da�dsldand serve ,as,tfiesbasis contained review�ingc� unity 11 Residential /Growth Management Process September 6, 1983 Page 4 ME REVIEW PROCESS: The residential /growth management review process will give landowners considerable flexibility in developing their properties as long as the project conforms to certain general criteria designed to protect and improve the public health, safety, convenience, and general welfare. The new review process will replace existing planned development and growth management regulations, while still retaining the fundamental principles of both. the review process will serve as the key mechanism by which the City guides the development of private land. The process will also establish guidelines for determining compatibility based on use, setback, height and bulk, architecture, landscape buffering, etc. The development potential for any particular site will be evaluated on its own merit Lased upon an assortment of criteria including public services, site plan design, architectural design quality, landscaping, access, environmental orderly development, etc. All residential projects (i.e. tentative maps, condominiums, apartrents, mobile home parks) would be processed under a s-ingle development and design review process, similar to our current procedures. This unified approach will reolace the mans different kinds of application procedures we cu*rentiy use (i.e. total development package, tentative subdivision map, custom lot subdivision, planned development). RG:DC:jr E El C1 CITY OF RANaiO CLCAMONCxA XGENMA X977 DEVELOPMENT_ CODE PUBLIC 'FEARING AUGUST 16, 1983 6:30 P.M. LIONS PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 9161 BASE LINE ROAD RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Barker X Commissioner Rempel_ X Commissioner Juarez X .- nissioner S *_out -� Commissioner McNiel rrived 6:45 I1. MEETING OBJECTIVE: Complete an overview of the Draft Code to gain an understanding of its basic content and how it was formu�ated; and complete detailed review of Chapters 1, 2, and 3 to reach a consensus on any changes to the proposed draft. III. OVERVIEW OF DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CODE A. What was t`r goal and basis for its creition? B. How will it relate to other planning documents? C. What is its basic contents? IV. PUBLIC HEARING AND DETAILED REVIEW OF CHAPTERS A. Chapter 1 - Administration B. Chapter 2 - Permits C. Chapter 3 - Land Development Review V. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11 p.m. adjournment time. I€ items go beyond that time, they shall be -- -heard only with the consent of the Commission. The Planning Commission reviewed Chapters 1, 2 art 3, made recommendations and reached consensus on various items. Staff will incorporate and bring back recommendations at their next Development Code meeting on September 6. L97 I. CALL TO ORDER Crry OF R.AjNuH0 aLCANIO \GA PLA, T.\L IlNG.. CONITN IISSION AG�� DEVELOPMENT,CODE PUBLIC HEARING AUGUST 16, 1983 6:30 P.M. LIONS PARK COMMUNITY CENTER 9163 BASE LIME ROAD FARCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Barker Commissioner Juarez Commissioner McNiel _ Commissioner R&npel Commissioner Stout II. MEETING OBJECTIVE: Comp et e an overview of the Draft Code to gain an understanding of its basic rz 1content , and how to reach fa consensus n any complete changesdetailed thereview proposed Chapter. draft. III. OVERVIEW OF DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CODE A. Knot was the goal and basis For its creation? B. How will it relate to other planning documents? C. What is its basic contents? IV. PUBLIC HEARING AND DETAILED REVIEW OF CHAPTERS A. Chapter 1 - Administration B. Chapter 2 - Permits C. Chapter 3 - Land Development Review V. ADJOUR NMENT R� T The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulat4ons that set an 11 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. I 1 LA L 7J CIn OF PJ%NCHO CUCAMOIIGA STAFF REPORT DATE: August 16, 1983 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Michael Vairin, Senior Planner SUBJECT: STAFF REPORT NO. 1 - DRAFT DrVE>_OPMENT CODE I. MEETING OBJECTIVE Tonight's public hearing is the first in a series of workshops which will be held during the months of September and October to review and ultimately provide a recommendation to the City Council on the draft Development Code. Tonight's objective will be to gain a further understanding of how the Development Code was drafted, how it relates to other planning documents, and what constitutes its basic element <_. We plan to review Chapters 1, 2, and 3 in more detail in order to have the Planning Comnission reach a general consensus on the content of these chapters and any needed changes. II. OVERVIR -1 OF DRAFT DEVELOPME14T CODE A. What was the goal and basis for its creation? When staff first began planning the Development Code ;ormat, we assembled the many ordinances and policies which had been previously adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council. It became apparent that these ordinances had become somewhat fragmented and difficult to view in a comprehensive nature. Therefore, ar overall goal for the Development Code was to develop a comprehensive document that provides guidance to all development- related issues with appropriate standards in order to promote and assure the health, safety, and welfare of all Rancho Cucamonga r^sidents. Further, this goal was refined into the following objectives: 1. Develop a clear, concise, and simple format for easy interpretation and understanding by the general public. 2. Combine all like development requirements in one document for easy access and information gathering. 3. Coordinate and implement the existing General Plan goals, objectives, and policies. Staff Report No. 1 - Draft Development Code Planning Commission Workshop August 16. 1583 Page 2 4. Coordinate development Guidelines and standards v.ith existing and proposed specific plans and planned communities. 5. Bring tooather and coordinate all previously adopted land use policies and ordinances, update and provide other needed 6. Develop new energy conservation guidelines, performance standards and design guidelines. 7. Whenever possible, simplify process without sacrificing for quality development. the planning and development the intent of the General Plan B. tlow will it relate to other planning documents? Over the last five years, the City has adopted four other land use regulatory documents; the Industrial Specific Plan, the Etiwanda Specific Plan, the Victoria Planned Community, and the Terra Vista Planned Community. These documents contain land use controls as well as development and design guidelines and standards for these specific areas. The area wtich these plans cover encompasses approximately two - thirds of the City's lend mass, therefore leaving the area generaily west of haven and north of the industrial area to be regulated mainly by the City's Development Code. _i, formulating the Development Code, much consi�eration was given to t makeup of these other plans and how they would relate to one another. A major step towards relating the documents and standards to one another was the change of traditional zoning districts, such as R -1. R -2, and R -3, to the land use districts which are used throughout the planned communities, specific plans, and the General Plan, which are VL, L, LM, etc. Other items, such as landscaping requirements, design guidelines, animal c-gulations, and parking regulations, were written to be cor_istent throughout the entire City area. C. What is the Code's basic contents? In all, the current proposal contains thirteen chapters. The first three chapters deal mainly with the administration, land use, permits and review process. Chapters 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 deal more specifically with actual land use development standards and regulations. The remaining chapters address themselves to special purpose overla; districts. I El L-1 iJ Staff Report No. i - Draft Development Cole ` Planning, Commission Workshop August 15, 1983 Page 3 Each chapter i3 arrang ^_d in a similar fashion, particularly the the land use �regulations arared located e9in1 then same Isect on case each chapter followed by development criteria, performance standards, and design guidelines. The style of each chapter teas been to combine standards into matrix forms for easy access and comprehension.. Additionally, within each chapter, such as the residential chapter and the commercial chapter, all development standards and design guidelines are contained within each chapter - in order to keep similar information in one place for easy access. 7I. GcTAIL£D REVIEW Or CHAPTERS A. Chapter 1 - Administration This chapter deals with many of the standard administration items which are needed for proper administration of the Cevelopment Code. The. chapter contains information regarding general administration, use determinations, City blanneheaauth authority, amendments and modifications, appeals, p u notifica'.on procedures, :.ode enforcement, and definitions. The _ following is a short review and statement on each section in this chapter. Section 1.1 - Administration and Section 1.2 - DevPelo e forth Distr— --.I t --- ese sections are tyF�ca sections ich set the purypose and intent of the Development Code and its consistency with the General Plan. Additionally, it describes each of the Development Districts and the applicability of the Code to properties and structures within. the City. Section 1.3 - Conflicts and Clarifications' This section that is a s andar section which is nee a or e a purposes any one section of the Code which may be challenged would not invalidate the remaining portion of the Code. Section 1.4 - Use Determination: This section deals with making a determination on a use which is not specifically listed in the Code, but which is similar to other uses. This is similar to what we currently do, the major difference is the procr�4ures are more fully outlined. Section 1.5 - Cit Planner: This section specifically outlines x_ e administrative responsibilities of the City Planner. These responsibilities are basically the ones which the City Planner currently possesses. E Staff Report No. 1 Planning Commission August 15, 1983 Page C Draft Devei?pment Code ucrk3hop '.section 1.6 - .Poesamerts: This is a procedure by which the text or the r+ap cou► be amen ed. This procedure is based in part by our current procedure as well as procedures required by Sate law. Section 1.7 - Redisionsftdifications_ This is o new section whits sets fort the procedure y whic�an appiica+�t could request modifications or revisions to a previously approved plan. Pepending on the severity of the pla-It charge, it would be accomplished either through an administrative procedure or by full revie4 of the Planning COW-Assion. the I �t_ and Sectio^ t.iu - �o .. . - - Eztens�ons: ese sections ea with appea pr uedures, Q-5provals, and the lapse of approval and procedures are procedures are essentially the same as currently employed. Section 1.11 - Business license: This section was added it order TO-7 a 1minate any potentta conf' =cts with the issuance of a business license for a business which is not a permitted use. Aa effort is being made to coordinate this section -with the r cthe by which business licenses are reviewed and approved Finance Department. SeLti,,n 1.12 - Public Hearin s and Hotificatign: This is the procedure by which public hearingc are con ucted and `.he method of the providing notification of such hearings. This incorporates has recent notification procedures that the Planning adopted. Section 1.13 - Code Enforcement: This sections sets forth the existing coda enforcement procedure and penalties for infractions to the Code. it also provides for enforcement and a::atenert of noise and disturbances. ea s with t e cnntinuazior., maintenance, abatement of non - conforming uses aid structures. This section rations, and Section 1.15 - Definitions: This section is the definition of terms use thrcug out the Development COe, as well as other terms which may require definition in order for proper administration of the Code. During the review of the Dcvelopment Codf, definitiovis may be required to be added or deleted based upon final outcome of the Code. �J E El E Staff Report No. 1 Planning Commission Aagust 16, 1983 Page 5 Draft Development Code Workshop B. Chapter 2 - Permits This chapter deals with the administration of all the various . 7ts that ar-r issued for land use fuctions and events. . and Section 2.2 - .ations: lese sections deal marniy •.pith the purpose _•. intent of tke chapter, as well as the bas.. procedure for acceptance of permit applications, extensions; and denials. Section 2.3 - Conditional Use Permits: This section is the full procedure or processing a ontlrtion lice Permit. This could include, depending on the proposed use, a development proposal or the same ascthe curie t procedure lfor conditional duse perm itscally proceoures4usedfornthe considerationnand grantinglof variances. ng Section 2.5 - Minor Variance: This section contains procedures for minor eviatiens which are currently contained within the Interim Zoning Ordinance. This section calls cut the specific areas where administrative relief could be granted. Section 2.6 - Home occupations- This section contains the criteria an processing procedures for a Some Occupation Permit. These are the same procedures and criteria that have recently been amended and adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council. Section 2.7 - Temporary Uses: This is a new section that deals with temporary uses. All temporary use requests will be processed in a similar fashion as outlined in this section. These uses take into account parking lot and sidewalk sales, outdoor art and craft shows, sale of agricultural products, carnivals, Christmas tree lots, etc. C. Chapter 3 - land Pevelopmeet Review This chapter provides the basic framework for reviewing all development projects through the development and design review process. The intent is to establish one overall ievelopment and design review process for all development projects. Chapter 3 is basically the review procedures and criteria for the processing of a development project. It is intended to be used in conjunction wits other chapters of the Development Code in order t, assure good quality development. Staff Report No. 1 - Draft Development Planning Commission Workshop August_ 16, 1983 Page 6 Section 3.1 - DeveloPnaentffiesign Review: This section fully outlines the purpose an intent of the development znd design review process. This process is basically the procedure which is currently employed by the use of the Design Review Committee, the Development Review Committee, and the Grading Committee. This procedure sets forth the basi: framework for review rf all development projects. Section 3.2 - !minor Devela erst Review: This section provides an administrative prose ure or minor development applications. The sections outline those projects which would qualify for a minor development review. The minor devcicpmf.nt review process is currently contained in the Interim Zoning Dr,dinance. Section 3.3 - Residential Lana veve.��• ihis section is use in conjunction wit ectzor. to estaiisTi the basic residential land development and design review process. Because of the need to add additional criteria to a residential project to comply with Growth Management, this section was needed to clearly outline the basic procedure, types of criteria, and requirements for public hearings. The success and effectiveness of the -review process rill be the ci:mbined use of the design guidelines and development standards. in the case_ Of residential projects, the existing growth management concepts 'lave been added to the prccess in the form of absolute policies and the requirement for public service letters. This process will be explained more fully when we review Chapter 4. In conclusion, Chapter 3 sets the framework for a comprehensive review process. Respectfully,submitted, J Rick Gomez City'Planner