The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1985/05/20 - Agenda Packets ,W ' .. N.w�:.; ;ye ,-, °a z w , ,u -„�? ";'"v:.,�7 ,, v.. z, ,` ,vy,,' v:�, t"t,'3� h„�, a ;'^r w, W :^an 0701 -02 o -20 -85 P.0, Agenda Packet o °�!�� << -�'�,� ��: p �;. �,;; ,..�� _...r..m... r, __ -i_ ACAM MY OF • P Rr+.i\GHQ Ci CAi4I( \GA- �� PLANNING CUMMISSION `.A.GE 1977 Monday May 20, 1985 6:00 P.M. Lions Park Community Center - Gallery West 9161 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamraga, California F PLANNING CCA41SSION WORKSHOP a TER! A VISTA DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMIENDNEidT 85 -03 - LEWIS i d Environmental Assessment: and Jerra Vista Development Plan Amendment 85 -03 Lewis - An amendment to tie Development Plan for the Terra Vista_ Planned Community to change the land use designations in the sot#1 - -fast quadrant including a hospital, commercial, office, and residential uses'., . L. Introductory Comments and Staff Report 6:00 - 6 :15 II. Presentation by Lewis Development Company 6 :15 - 6:34 III. Discussion of Related Issues /Concerns 6:30 - 8` :00 � Adjourn to May 22, 1985 regular Planning Commission meeting - 8:00 i i Planning Commission Action CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. STAFF REPORT r 9s 0 0 F � L U > DATE: May 20, 1985 19" TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission PROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Manner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA DEVELOPMENT PLAN r AMENDMENT 85-03 LEWIS - An amendment to the Deve opment P -fin fu; the Terra Vista Planned Community to change the land use designations i., the southeast quadrant including a hospital, commercial, office, and residential uses. I. ABSTRACT: This workshop is scheduled to facilitate Commission review of the land use options, !;►d provide direction relative to uses surrounding the hospital sie, the auto center designation, and residential densities. The amendment should then be revJsel f accordingly, the environmental assa,; ment completed, and th:' project scheduled for final review and consideration at a!,i E advertised public hearing. 0.. II. BACKGROUND: At the Planning Cormmission hearing on April 10, 1985 t go m ssion recommended approval of the new hospital site, but expressed concern with the change from Auto Plaza to Executive Park, an:i density increases surrourding the hospital site. The City Council reviewed the Commission reco+mnendation and continued final action until the Commission resolves the remaining q issues. Based upon input from the City Attorney, the Council determined that the amendment is inconsistent with the Terra Vista Development Agreement unless all 386 units currently designated for the Milliken Hospital site are reallocated oa the land use plan. A. revision to the Development Agreement must be mutually acceptable to Lewis Homes and the City, and requiv°s Commission and Council review at public hearings. Three basic issues need to be resolved as follows: 1. What land uses are most riq,-opriate surround, g the hospital /medical office sitf (i.e., residential land use intensity and commerci =' uses)? 2. Should the auto center remain a primary land use east of the hospital site? PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Terra Vi'zta Development Plan Amendment II5-03 - Lewis May 20, 1485 �. Page 2 3. Should the density of nearby areas be increased to accommodate units displaced by the hospital /medical office site? These issues are discussed in the Analysis Section and Land Use Options for discussion purposes provided. In addition, Lewis Development Company has provided a letter explaining the amendment. IIl. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The following graphic shows the current land Use plan with . acres of High Residential (386 units) 4t the new hospital site, and tfie Auto Plaza center betwaen. Milliken and Rochester. A. EXISTING CONCEPT R Sill TIA LM L0wmEDwD0mff M cum" MFi VZMVA H04 a R-ee H � W+ TM Ct L CC COWA TYCO�u�ncw� C Cowan" NC mm +O_ RC iEMAT1OMCOhYMC& MIXED S MFC FM9ULRa1SUMMFMSoe4M AM c� u OF P,AA MO OFo" COr MOM. "soemnt P Q_Q & QUAS I�P BLt JrH .R"W"M SCWH=I I E El—WOY Bc"Om Veoo�m� P mrxc Nia WSWAL W5 STOP cRUM ASS=ATES PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tc-rra Vista Development Plan Amendment 85 -03 Lewis May 20, 1985 Page 3 The following graphic shows the amendment as proposed by Lewis Homes. The 386 units from the new hospital site are redi,>tributed by expanding the residential acreage south of Poplar Urine and increasing the density of the two properties on the north side of Church Street. The total land area for residential is about the same as the current land use plan (t.l acre leas). The Auto Plaza designation is removed, but automobile sales is designated at the intersection of Foothill and Rochester. B. AMENDMENT #I CONCEPT ®P M NC MH LM ' i� P _ LM LM LM uw { LM E LM' ,;(H �f a LM— LM LM �i M / LM Mme` P � � RC ►4H MH E E LM MH ® f F% LM LOw ASDAJM 074sm .M NEDiMDERSI4Y MH uEm" .c�I O04" H tE�10Ernnv COVAUM COMMEFICIAL C NC r oCM RC MMATM&COU%M=AL OP OMMPMK MI USE MFC FtiAlICL1L Fz ssatfla+rrs ICES MQC FZSCr—,'rL4& camw oFFCS ( HOIOFFICE,COMMERCIAL,MECICAI. P BLi UA 1 -P 'B l JPH AcaORlW500MI-1 E ` ELFAEIRAIIY SCROOL tit PARRS P HC . WS STOP J M i HOSPITAL 119A (O.t ACI Si ,10.0 AC) B FC. OWCEIMEDICAU AUTO I MEDICAIf . COLWERMAL GRUEN ASSOCIATES I OFFICES (31.0 AC) Isla AC) `•!^' ` �_—MPARII'L__,1,__�"fPA LCUT KIVE��„� _ h PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Terra Vista Development Plan Amendment 85 -03 - Lewis May 20, 1985 Page 4 Ile following is a breakdown of the land use category in each acreage for ~both the current land use plan and the amendment as currently proposed. COMPARISON OF STATISTICS FOR AMENDED AREA RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL ACREAGE LIVI o M o MH o H NON•RESIDEN rIAL ACREAGE • HOSPITAL (HO) • OFFICE /COMMERCIAL /AUTO /MEDICAL RELATED FACILITIES (MAC /MOC) • OFFICE /COMMERCIAL /MEDICAL RELATED FACILIT ;ES (MO/MHO)' TOTAL ACREAGE (PART OF MHO PARCEL n S GS t`l'�" ra l`i ri=x rpm "AL IV. ISSUES/ALTERNATIVES: A. Land Uses Surrounding the Hospital /Medical Office Site: The hospital and medical health care campus 1r�fiha community focal point. From an urban design perspective, the land uses surrounding the hospital should provide an appropriate interface and transition to complement the project. This issue of compatibility relates to both residential and commercial /office land uses. t C A 8 ALTERNATE ADOPTED - AMENDMENT AMENDMEN PLAN NO.1 NO.1 1003 1003 1003 59.9 58.8 59.9 17.6 — 17.6 13.6 17.6 13.6 — 13.6 — 28.7 18.8 28.7 72.9 74.0 72.9 10.0 10.01 10.01 ' 46.2 43.0 41.9 16.7 21.0 21.0 " 132.8 132.8 132.8 S GS t`l'�" ra l`i ri=x rpm "AL IV. ISSUES/ALTERNATIVES: A. Land Uses Surrounding the Hospital /Medical Office Site: The hospital and medical health care campus 1r�fiha community focal point. From an urban design perspective, the land uses surrounding the hospital should provide an appropriate interface and transition to complement the project. This issue of compatibility relates to both residential and commercial /office land uses. t PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Terra Vista Development Plan Amendment 85 -03 - Uewis May 20, 1985 Page Residential. The current land use plan his Medium Residential T4_-T47_d57_acT and Medium High Residential (14 -24 du /ac) on the north side of Church Street. Development at the lower end of the Medium Residential category could be s'ngle- family homes with townhouses, condominiums, and apartments, built at the mid_ upper range. Development in the Medium -High Residential category could be a wide range of attached product types._ Given this wide range; and understanding that the Terra Vista plan allows flexibility of land use categories, the Comnission should provide direction as to the most appropriate density range and /or. product type. Commercial /Office. The Terra Vista Plan shows the Auto Plaza on the east side of Orchard Avenue directly across from the mredical health care campus. Does the Commission feel this is appropriate or should office type development be located along Orchard Avenue to create a buffer and transition? B. Auto Plaza: The amendment as proposed would eliminate the Auto azi�T a as a primary land use•, however, automobile sales would remain as a permitted use. A review of locational criteria for successful automotible plazas reveal that freeway visibility and access is a key criteria. In addil.ion, the minimum size should be :approximately 40 ecres to permit from 6 to 8 dealerships. The Auto Plaza shown in the Planned Community Text would not satisfy these criteriz. However, if the Commission desires, Lewis Homes has provided an alternative land- use plan which specifically designates an Auto Plaza at the northeast corner of Foothill and Rochester. C. Residential Land Uses: 'three options are provided below with respect to redistri uting the 386 dwelling ua;'`;s currently provided for at the new 'hospital site. The Comas ;ion should first discuss if the redistribution should occur. According to the City Attorney, if some or all of the 386 units are not specifically called out on the land use plan, an amendment to the Development Agreement must occur. Lewis .Homes must also agree to the revision. The following alternatives are provided to aid the discussion: µ.ms PLANZNG COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Terra Vista Development Plan Amendment 85 -03 Levis May 2o, 1985 , Page 6 1. The first option illustrated below would revise the residential land uses south of Church Street and Poplar Drive as requested by Lewis. North of Church Street, however, the land uses- would not change from the current designations. The result of this alternative is an overall reduction of 1p,8 dwelling units. B. AMENDMENT #1 CONCEPT I� Fib `ice LM W!mzC&Nr,xwy M MMMOMTY MH �� • H �en+aHSrt,r A CC Co C COMMERCIAL NC MmiancoocommUCAL RC iFOlEATIO.M.C42MEIAL OR :' OMM PART MIX FJD USE Mac eouvHaa r MHO OFFICE. COMMERCIAL. MEDICAL E 11M QUASEV i JrH AHORHMSCROOLIrL i E EIZOWARY SCHOOL I-) -F RMS NO HOWAL WE SMP n—c AssowzEs PLANNIN& COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Terra Vista Development Plan Amendment 85 -03 - Lewis May 20, 1985 Page 3 2.. The second option was prepared by Lewis Homes and provides for the total distribution of the 386 units south of Church Street and Poplar Drive. The 14.3 acres of 'High Residential' at the Milliken hospital- site was simply relocated to tho Rochester hospital site. C. ALTERNATE;. AMENDMENT #1 CONCEPT OP I 'I NC MH Iii LM M ��ry LM " % I P / LM .LM LM LM W( E . JrH { LM iLM M LM U9 LM ' L E � RC MH LM t M I- MH k P H . ASISUFER )NO TRML (20.TAa. AD=Eha HOSPITAL Atweehim E%lSnn6 1109AC1' I� elnOU FAxiLY FIA MFC OFFICE/Mn 1LAV •� MECICE LONVAERCIAL AUTO ,q 3 i tl 1.0 AC 1619 ACI ' °%.� L GRUEN ASSOCiA�E .1219 A01 t ARK t PA KIVE __L- ALAZA� �. LM L0W MMAJM Dimm M me" Daisr" MH laoa<aaltmD'; " H KwD0mn7 AL CC CC�EW C COW AMUL NC Reaeaaaa Cow" At RC —TnHALax+mael. OP 0mci P &RR MI ED SE MFC FwAHCU1.Pc'4. TAtwxm m=G4m MO mumccmeau.kwealm P BLI ASE -P BLI JrH A1M011HKINsL7YD01.tn , E - EIF —my sc"00L tnwnl PARK P HO HosPVa ells STOP H . ASISUFER )NO TRML (20.TAa. AD=Eha HOSPITAL Atweehim E%lSnn6 1109AC1' I� elnOU FAxiLY FIA MFC OFFICE/Mn 1LAV •� MECICE LONVAERCIAL AUTO ,q 3 i tl 1.0 AC 1619 ACI ' °%.� L GRUEN ASSOCiA�E .1219 A01 t ARK t PA KIVE __L- ALAZA� �. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Terra Vista Development Plan Amendment 85 -03 - Lewis May 20, 1985 Page 8 3.. The third option available is to approve the residential land use changes originally proposed by Lewis. B.AMENDMEN" #1 CONCEPT nwn t D. Area Development Plan: As a means to help resolve the land use issues created by the flexibility built into the Terra Vista Plan for adjusting residential land uses, the Commission should conside, requiring an area development plan for the southeast quadrant: of Terra Vista. The benefits of an area development plan would be to solidify density ranges and product types on specific sites. Preparation of the plan would, however, require additional time and considerable effort on the part of Lewis. If the Commission can provide specific directinn, preparation -if an area development plan would be desirable to help address concerns. t LM tor�eaauoorn M wmwaoan MH++ H CC eaow.rt+ca+oru� C NC �omsaooea,�eau. RC A0futvwLC04WK On2PMK USE Ii411pW RiTMIOtMSItSOB/It4 MOO QS, , eaNaawarr�a. MHO DItKe CM"xea6MldrJc 1 .kit s.rw .A'....� E aateearwrxt ee® p nics HO IEM�M rat" nwn t D. Area Development Plan: As a means to help resolve the land use issues created by the flexibility built into the Terra Vista Plan for adjusting residential land uses, the Commission should conside, requiring an area development plan for the southeast quadrant: of Terra Vista. The benefits of an area development plan would be to solidify density ranges and product types on specific sites. Preparation of the plan would, however, require additional time and considerable effort on the part of Lewis. If the Commission can provide specific directinn, preparation -if an area development plan would be desirable to help address concerns. t " PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Terra Vista Development Plan Amendment 85 -03 - Lewis 4 May 20, 1985 Paye 9 IV. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should provide specific direction to ,taff and Lewis Homes relative to: A. Lana uses surrounding the hospital site; B. The auto plaza as the primary use; and C Distr'►uution of the. 386 ,dwelling units on the new hospital site. In addition, the Commission should discuss the possiuility of requiring an area development plan which addresses the issues and oncerns. Res tf 1 sub *tted, ick ' om I it ner RG:CJ:ns ?f Attachments: Density Distribution Plan Correspondence from Lewis o FlIiAi M Density Distribution Plan VI-10 'rte 0 �If SeaNl"{•r•SAW �1000 is,— Lr' In led TITER: Z�:vs�� Des:. ��.a.✓� EXHIBM el— _ SCALE- LM �o.r.miycirn t.y wr.a M ian�rrt l:ugvafl 6frri� rgokwo�er nr.. ay.a /i 11M0� gr100441C cc nawan corsar C coral NC �Y RC ot+xarcmear np awct qit AsruY.rensawasa� ca�aiow.a�v. M0 a.aaawoa.�e►♦ JrH +rouaom�.v.�� E cr.cwnoa �� p .wa FIU �+♦ u eo- �If SeaNl"{•r•SAW �1000 is,— Lr' In led TITER: Z�:vs�� Des:. ��.a.✓� EXHIBM el— _ SCALE- LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. 1158 NOM Mif V0h Jraauo / AO &w d7o / wbr4 c l Vtx6 / 7t4 Vas -o971 May 15,1985 Planning Commission City of Rancho'Cucamonga 9320 -C Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re MAY 20 WORKSHOP - AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN Dear Planning Commissioners: We appreciate your commitment of time to the upcoming workshop, and we are very glad to have this opportunity to talk with you directly„ The purpose of this letter is to explain the thinking behind otlr amendment proposal for the southeast portion of Terra Vista, and to offer an alternative that may address some of your concerns. I would like to address a few points which seem to be the bazis of some misunderstanding. There Appears to be same feeling that Lewis Development Co. is getting a °kindfall" by having the hospital, that vie are harming other commercial elements of the plan in order to create the health campus, that we are also seeking to raise residential eensities, and than the amendment as a whole represents an attempt to "have our cake and; +:rat it too." This is an unfortunate and inaccurate misconception Orr our intent. 3n an effort to improve communication, I offer the following: First, the hospital does not represent a "windfall" to us in any sense. The Cummunity Plan has always included the hospital. The approval by the State was also no windfall; under its own guidelines, the State could not possibly have approved the competing application. Our serious discussions with National MRdical Enterpri�ins date back to 29 &1. Those discussions were suspended while NME concentrated on its Rialto projecZ, and began again in earnest over a year ago. At that time, it became clear that NME's original time estimates for the—hospital could be substantially accelerated because of the growth in the Area. For the same reason, NME determined that an entire medical campus, not just a hospital, was warranted for Rancho Cucamonga. This change in the scope and service area of the facility, in their opinion and ours, call's for a more central and accessible location. . h Planning Commission May 15, 1985. Page 2 believe the benefit of this change for the City and its residents probably outweighs the direct benefit to us. NME, not Lewisy will own and opsrate the major part of the campus. The principal beneficiaries of this plan amendment, as we see it, are the residents of Rancho Cucamonga who will have Netter health care. Secondly, in informal discussions with staff in preparation of the workshop, we learned that there is a misconceVtion about the effect of the larger medical campus on the adjoining uses. As the enclosed graphics show, the land for the additional medical facilities was not "taken away" from residential acreage. The original plan showed 28.7 acres of residential use withiry the MO and MAC mixed -use parcels; the amendment as submitted showed 27.6 acres. The land for the expanded medical campus came from the of €ice /commercial uses in the MO parcel which are eliminated by the hospital and from the office /commercial area behind the auto center. Unfortunately, in the statistics, tuts area is combined with te auto center itself, leaving the impression that we reduc,-J the size of +,he auto center in order to expand the medical Lampus; this is not so. Except for the el_Ainatien of commercial use in the MO parcel, the :amendment does not significantly change the uses that pare alread;I there; it simply rearranges them. Finally, it was _not our intent in this amendment to upzone residential uses to higher densities. We, in fact, perceived the amendment as a downzone, because it eliminated a sizeable area of High density that was already approved and spread those units over projects of lower densities. It is now obvious that the approach we proposed is not )Rrceived this way and it is not preferred by :s City. We treated the residential uses the way we did only because our planning consultant: felt that the City ..jdld prefer f lower density at the original hospital location. it is a simple matter to balance the plan by placing High density there instead, so that no change would be Yiecessary to the residential uses norm cf Church Street. The distribution of residential densities would then be exactly the same as in the original Community Plan. This alternative concept is illustrated in }l the enclosed graphic and.table. The High density area would be buffered from the residential uses to the north and east by streets, landscaped { setbacks, and a mester- planned trail. We believe this alternative would address the concerns the Planning Commission raised, and we• recommend it for your consideration. Our objective in the r,N�visions to the property surrounaing the hospital site was simply to create the most sensible land usn relationships in light of the new hospital location, without changing the basic concepts of the f plan. The land use relationships that we consider important in connection with the hospital are these: Planning Commission May 15, 1985 P 3 .age P • The hospital needs office space immed atA y adjacent. This allows a close wirking relationship betw.,en local doctors (many of whom may be on staff) and the hospital. It also 3reatly increases convenience for patients w'ien, for example, the physician orders tests which can only bat ou.e at the hospital. e The potential should exist for related medical facilities near the hospital. These could include, for instance, convalescent hospitals, nursing homes, psychiatric hospitals, or specialized clinics of various types. While we cannot predict the nature and extent of tr;?e Tuff is i%ic °s, NME is buying enough land to build one such faciT`;ty next to the hospital and has expressed interest in another, o Certain support uses will be needed to serve both the medical facilities and thr private practitioners. These could he service or sales busi! %asses (for example, optica! products, prosthetic devices, wheelch;A r rental). There is also a need for more general support uses such as a convenient coffee shop for patients and staff; nearby restaurants for use by docOrs and staff at lunchtime convenient banking facilities; and business services for the doctors. NME has advised us 'hat hotels, if attainable, are mutually beneficial neighbors to hospitals when, for instance, out -of -town relatives visit patients, or a patient's relatives need rest but do not wish to be far affray. inaliy, a public pork is a va4uable amenity for all concern -_d. e s -in4, particular "Y ;,',@aer density housing, is needed near the ;,tal. Many senior citizens will want to live near the m�,.. al ccriplex. Some will desire independent living; others may reed some combination of personal care, he&tu+ monitorinc, and diming / ocial services. In addition, doctors and other staff will benefit by convenient apartments or condominiums so that they can be at the hospital on very short notice. Multifamily housing to ;, rve the general housing needs of the area is also called for is this vicinity, because of the adjoining office / commercial scr,vices and because the community's circulation network, transit routes, and, open space network all cotra together hare. There should be sufficient housing to meet all oIese neeJs within easy walking distance of the medical campus. The relocation of the hospital to Mil'iken makes sense for many reasons, _ which you have already reviewed -- access, centrality, adjoining, uses. With the hospital there., the need for other medical facilities, offices, and support services dictates the adjoining uses to the south and east. The Planning Comnissioq May 15, 1985 _ Page 4 auto plaza was moved eastward >lightly in order to make room for additional medical offices. It was also felt that the auto plaza should be moved fat-ther away from the hospital itself, so :hat bedridden patients will not look down all day onto the service yards at the rear of the automobile "'arships, To address your concerns about the auto plaza, we propose to eliminate the changes that were included in the amendment acid just leave the discussion of the auto plaza the say it was. In: ,they words, the text will use the G original wording; and the gr- ap�ics will identify the auto plaza rather than the more generic 'commercial" use, The original language of the Community r Plan does provide flexibility to seek another use here if xhe City obtains an auto center at another l;:ation, and we feel it is important to retain _ that flexibility. I hope this letter will be of some help in resolving the land use for this '._ area. More specific details will, of course, be Yadressed in an Area Plan. �r Thank you again for your time and attention. Cordially, r %11a /" !Ll ock Project Manager KM : kr :05058 iEnclosures uj 0 a.r T LLIE tl s 1 i � ►� li e LU a a a z SII i a3 w x c� IN ICY IL J U 1 U, d �! as i ui J hY C3 X I° 9L z 0 z Lu fU '49 mi `? zj �Q¢ LL, comic < y ILI 40cc 0 !L ®_� F. w; r x. LU t i Q e � j lu 0 !% . 3§ . . lu . . k �. E us.� k ■ \ � « k mj \ice 2 U, \2 ■ k; «�. z cam a. 0.a ■ UJ call � o k °j a $ c C 1, �21k Fm .... - zm F 2 2 y2# I£ Im - , !% . 22w\ 3§ . . lu . . k �. 2 ■ \ . k \ice 2 \ eu-J ■ k; «�. z ■ 0.a . 22w\ COMPARISON OF STATISTICS FOR AMENDED AREA C A 6 ALTERNATE ADOPTED AMENDMENT AMENDMENT PLAN - NO.1 NO.1 RESIDENTIAL UNITS 1,003 1003 1003 RESIDENTIAL ACREAGE 59.9 58.8 5919 s LM 7.6 — 17.6 e M 13.6 17.6 13.6 i MH — 13.6 — s H 28.7 18.8 28.7 NON - RESIDENTIAL ACREAGE 72.9 74.0 72,9 s HOSPITAL (HO) 10.0 10.0, 10.01 s OFFICE /COMMERCIAL /AUTO /MEDICAL 46.2 43.0 41.9 RELATED FACILITIES (MAC /MOC) s OFFICE /COMMERCIAL /MEDICAL 19:7 21.0 21.0 RELATED FACILITIES (MO /MHO)' TOTAL ACREAGE 132.8 132.8 132.8 IPART OF MHO PARCEL E 6: