Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-12-13 - SupplementalsPlanning Commission Update Urgency Interim Zoning Ordinance -Hotels December 13, 2017 t 4e-^1 3 Background • City Council adopted two Urgency Ordinances • October 4, 2017 — Urgency Ordinance 919 • November 15, 2017 — Urgency Ordinance 923 • Requires a CUP for all new hotel development within the City • Expires on October 3, 2018 Hotels in Rancho Cucamonga 0 oothiU Fwy ' Foothill Fw'. AnS. _ ALTALOMA 12 n = inumery _y _.,,rJi- - Vic na Gardens (�Lp� sr_ *•x�Rancho Cucamonga ui•. c y ® FFaulhill Blvd �: pLg to HistorK RIe 66 _ n er.ow eu.n. O Clones Marijuana Plants = _ Y California Cannabis._ Airetoom Bedding Co r Operating Hotel Is ^r s: - �. erica, Inc.InUnder ONongshim America, Construction ... i . ran 5• .. -�--�e�m►T `- 2 �= Approved not built Garden Inn o/Rancho... .... _ - i .- ii. Current concerns • Hotels are permitted in many zones within the City • The current permitted zones have different requirements • Increased segmentation in the hotel business • Long-term stay hotels • Suite hotels • Other cities that have had significant growth in hotel development have seen negative community impacts Goals for a Permanent Ordinance • Ensure proper siting of new hotels within the City • Develop standard operating requirements to ensure consistent operation over the long term • Avoid negative community impacts by developing appropriate land use controls • Prevent the development of hotels from negatively impacting City operations Applicant CP Logistics Utica, LLC Applications 1. Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19823 2. Design Review DRC2017-00402 3. Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00404 4. Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00405 5. Minor Exception DRC2017-00406 6. Minor Exception DRC2017-00408 Aerial Photo of Project Site ' .A RIA -..0, Sr � ea a .III 4 1 a , .d Project .• . dl e� a91. _ W Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19823 • Proposal to subdivide one existing p Y parcel of 13.96 acres into three new Parcel 3 sr parcels4�' 1 Parcel Area Acres Parcel 1 6.02 Parcel 2 6.07 Parcel 3 1.87 Total Area 13.96 • Meets minimum lot width (100') requirements • Meets minimum lot area (0.5 al requirements ` Parcel - --- Design Review DRC2017-00402 • Applicant proposes to construct three warehouse buildings. Office SF Warehouse SF Overall Area SF —Building 1 11,000 106,500 117,500 —Building 2 7,000 137,395 144,395 Building 3 4,000 27,388 31,388 Project Total 22,000 271,283 293,283 • Floor Area Ratio of 48.2% (max of 60%) • 216 parking spaces provided (214 req) • 30 trailer parking spaces (1/dock req) • Adequate dock area screening provided • Landscape coverage of 15.04% (15% req) • Complies with City's Water Budget requirement T�aae ar � N„ t 0 jildinq 3 Bentley Street a - FIs 4'^ Street CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA West EW4atlon South Elevation East Elevotm CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA West Elevadon South Elevation East Elevation CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00404 • Applicant proposes to establish sign criteria for the complex • 1 Project Identification Monument • 3 Tenant Monuments • 24 square feet per monument • 4 Tenant Building Signs`"�"'Po`� 150 square feet per signE INDICATING • w MAX / FOR ONE TENANT SIGN AREA �`��' / FOR ONE LINE OF TEXT o-a_ �.I_ _____- o_lo -QTEN_ -- ME------------ Typical Elevation (One line of text) Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00405 • Applicant proposes to remove a total of 15 trees • Aleppo Pine and Red Ironbark 11 heritage trees exist, Arborist report • 30 feet + tall and 20 in( diameter Existing trees conflict with proposed improvements Project includes the planting of 238 trees Project meets minimum tree count requirements JM w-MOMY0 Y ' t' 133H18 A3-1N38 Minor Exception DRC2017-00406 • Proposal to reduce the required average depth of landscape along 41" Street by 10% • Required depth is 45 feet • Deficient due to right turn lane along 41" Street • Provided depth is 40.5 feet • Project complies with average depth of landscape along all other street frontages • Project complies with landscape coverage 40. AVERA E DEPTH OF I LANDS APE PROPOSED IN MINOREXCEPTION #1 I� �I 451 AVER EVER E DEP LANDS APE AS REOUIR4. DEVEL PMENT CODE SEC4 17.36.Q40 I I APPROXIMATE)--{ !` LOCATION OF k' BUS STOP _. i LZ � I I Minor Exception DRC2017-00408 • Proposal to increase the allowable wall height within the building setback area along Trademark Parkway North by 2 feet • Max height allowed within building setback area — 3 feet • Minor Exception allows for up to 2 feet of additional wall height • Proposed wall height is 5 feet NAiriht is nArAccary to crrapn rinrk arAa Previous Meetings • Planning Commission Workshop — Held on December 141 2016. The Commission generally supported the site layout and building design. • Neighborhood Meeting — Held on August 29, 2017. One business owner attended. No major concerns presented. • Technical Review Committee Meeting - Held on September 19, 2017. No issues were raised. • Design Review Committee Meeting — Held on September 19, 2017. No issues were raised. The Committee recommended the project move forward to the Planning Commission. Environmental Assessment • A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project and was circulated on November 1, 2017. • Mitigation Measures are Biological Resources, Transportation/Traffic and less than significant level. required to reduce impacts to Cultural Resources, Noise, Tribal Cultural Resources to • Comment received from Native American Commission (NAHC) regarding the wording of a Resources Mitigation Measure (CUL-2): • County Coroner shall contact the NAHC, not applicant. • Mitigation CUL-2 was revised to reflect this. • No other comments received. Heritage Cultural RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and 2. Approve Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19823, Design Review DRC2017-00402, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00404, Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00405, Minor Exception DRC2017-00406 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00408 through adoption of the attached Resolutions. Off% Planning Commission Updates for December 13, 2017 I wanted to provide an update on this year's transportation bill. As you know SB 1 (Transportation Funding) passed. While there are still very real threats to this legislation, the League Board has decided not to support opposition given the political capital expended getting this passed. Instead, the League is focusing on measures to protecting revenues earmarked for transportation. Currently, there is a bill ACA-5 proposed for the June ballot, to do just that. (ACA-5 Motor vehicle fees and taxes: restriction on expenditures: appropriations limit.) A key section (SEC.15 has been added reading "SEC. 15. • This also includes Article XIX D which includes protecting Vehicle License Fee revenues for transportation purposes. Verbiage is "Appropriations subject to limitation" of each entity of government shall not include appropriations of revenues from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account created by the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, or any other revenues deposited into any other funds pursuant to the act. No adjustment in the appropriations limit of any entity of government shall be required pursuant to Section 3 as a result of revenues being deposited in or appropriated from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account created by the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 or any other account pursuant to the act. • The Board took other focus measures: • (as captured above) ACA 5 (additional protection for transportation funding): Support • SB 5 (Park and Water Bond): Support • SB 3 (Housing Bond): Support • Pending ballot measure to repeal existing transportation funding for California cities: Oppose General EOY announcements • I'd like to recognize our very own Danielle Boldt, Captain of our Rancho Cucamonga Sheriff's station, who retired recently. I wanted to express our gratitude for a job well done, and send our commission's best wishes for the future. • I also believe that it's appropriate, since it's the end of the year, to take a moment to thank our City Council (Mayor Michael), Council members Williams, Alexander, Spagnolo, and Kennedy, City Manager (John Gillison), our Planning Director (Candyce Burnett), and planning staff (Planners, Secretary Lois Schrader for their ample support this past year. All of these people, and teams make us look much better than we have a right to expect. • A special nod to the excellent commission that I have the privilege to serve with: Rich Fletcher (15 years of service), Francisco Oaxaca, Ray Wimberly, Rich Macias. Thank you for your service. 2018 Strategic Goals 1. Address Public Safety Concerns of California Cities. • Address public safety concerns arising from recently enacted reduced sentencing laws. • Protect local funding and authority in the implementation of the Adult Use of Marijuana Act. • Continue to preserve city rights to deliver emergency medical services (Health and Safety Code 1797.201). • Seek additional tools and resources to address critical community challenges such as homelessness, mental health, domestic violence, drug rehabilitation, ex -offender reentry7 and human trafficking. 2. Ensure Sustainability of Public Pension and Retirement Health Benefits. • Consistent with the League's adopted pension sustainability principles, work with affected stakeholders, employees, CalPERS, legislators and the Governor to achieve meaningful options for cities to address growing unfunded pension liabilities that will ensure cities remain solvent and provide services to residents while continuing to offer employees meaningful and sustainable pension and health benefits. 3. Protect Existing Transportation Funding for Local Priorities. • Protect existing transportation funding for local priorities and oppose efforts that would reduce or eliminate funding for cities. 4. Improve Housing Affordability and Support Additional Resources to Address the Homelessness Crisis. • Increase state and federal financial support and provide additional local incentives and tools to improve housing affordability and develop more workforce and affordable housing. Support additional resources and tools to address the homelessness crisis and advance the recommendations of the CSAC-League Homelessness Task Force. • SB 5 (Park and Water Bond): Support ■ This bill would enact the California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2018, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in an amount of $4,000,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a drought, water, parks, climate, coastal protection, and outdoor access for all program. The bill, upon voter approval, would reallocate $100,000,000 of the unissued bonds authorized for the purposes of Propositions 1, 40, and 84 to finance the purposes of a drought, water, parks, climate, coastal protection, and outdoor access for all program. ■ The bill would provide for the submission of these provisions to the voters at the June 5, 2018, statewide primary direct election. ■ This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. • SB 3 (Housing Bond): Support ■ SB 3, Beall. Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2618. ■ Under existing law, there are programs providing assistance for, among other things, emergency housing, multifamily housing, farmworker housing, home ownership for very low and low-income households, and downpayment assistance for first-time home buyers. Existing law also authorizes the issuance of bonds in specified amounts pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law and requires that proceeds from the sale of these bonds be used to finance various existing housing programs, capital outlay related to infill development, brownfield cleanup that promotes infill development, and housing -related parks. Existing law, the Veterans' Bond Act of 2008, authorized, for purposes of financing a specified program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, the issuance, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law, of bonds in the amount of $900,000,000. ■ This bill would enact the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018, which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,000,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law. Of the proceeds from the sale of these bonds, $3,000,000,000 would be used to finance various existing housing programs, as well as infill infrastructure financing and affordable housing matching grant programs, as provided, and $1,000,000,000 would be used to provide additional funding for the above -described program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, as provided. ■ This bill would provide for submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 6, 2018, statewide general election in accordance with specified law. , ■ This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. M�T Michael Baker PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION • Plan Overview • Summary of Public Input • Public Realm Framework • Street Network • Open Space Network • Neighborhood Sub -Areas • Wilson Village Center • Wilson Neighborhood/Heights • Milliken Heights • College Center • East/West Neighborhoods • Upper Sphere Rural Development • Commission Discussion/Direction (�iC:f4(1VfiA i ' WHY A PLAN FOR THIS AREA? SELF DETERMINATION 1. Local Control Current County land use designations in the upper area call for a patchwork of residential area intermixed with open space areas. The lower area is no longer needed for flood control and the County is going to sell it for development. 2. Fiscal Sustainability The City will not take control of this area unless the result would be fiscally positive for the City. This requires some development in the lower area to avoid burdening existing residents with new taxes. 3. Limited Development Area State and federal regulatory agencies will not allow the entire lower area to be developed with housing like the rest of the City's foothill neighborhoods. So enough development to fund the conservation must be fit into the available area. 4. Commercial/Mixed-Use Village Center Some meaningful portion of the development must be commercial, or else the result will be a fiscal burden on existing taxpayers. ., �OANONfd N L A - J l i F 1, , .. _ ::$ RGC NT P' {naafi w 80 1, • 4 AAA— -1 0 1 E � rr-4—— �(�Oti m w cJ G -IBM- 000 too CONSERVATION PRIORITY AREA MOSTLY HABITAT CONSERVATION + LIMITED LOW INTENSITY RURAL HOUSING H.� - Qaauosu NcerH EASTEPH SPHEPF ANNEX ATJUf, SPELIFK PLAN �..SARGENT _ae TOIN PI ANNiNG DEVELOPMENT PRIORITY AREA MIX OF HABITAT RESTORATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT -01 nNT t„" RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN KEY OBJECTIVES RELATED TO THIS SPECIFIC PLAN • Systematically and permanently conserve the unique habitats of the Sphere of Influence area • Enhance access to and frame views of the mountains, open spaces and habitat ■ Develop a balanced, integrated, multi -modal transportation system • Inspire and support a community culture and lifestyle that embraces health and sustainability • Provide missing housing/lifestyle options in new sustainable neighborhoods. ■ Protect the character and high quality of established residential neighborhoods. • Provide high quality parks and recreational opportunities PUBLIC WORKSHOP INPUT ■ Local Control • Most people were not fans of letting the County control development of the area • There was general interest in Rancho Cucamonga taking charge of decision making • Also general interest in taking good care of the foothill environment and habitat • Fiscal Responsibility • No interest in existing taxpayers paying to conserve the foothills • Traffic/Access • Some favor connecting Wilson to relieve Banyan congestion and improve access • Some concerned that it will increase traffic • Many concerned with congestion around schools and along Banyan • Property Value • Owners of land in upper sphere area concerned about taking of property rights/value 11IC§r= SMI SARGENT all rOx n PL.Arvry IN PUBLIC WORKSHOP INPUT ■ Development • Many people assumed nothing would be developed in this area • Others assumed that housing like that to the east and west might be built • Many assumed there would be no commercial north of the 210 or Banyan • Some very interested in the idea of more housing options and neighborhood amenities in this area — many not at all interested • Views and access to mountains • Views of mountains and valleys are valued • Existing flood control channel roads are used for walking/biking — many would value their improvement and connection to the foothill open spaces (Znaati� MI V A R C C N T _ ,, ' M. wi ' - �. •Y f Ate' i 1 P. i c� I"I k G-ongle :mow 5 � 'Mile, 71111\IIIIA V. n {[{[io 11 S �y\�Y: O Carmel �' Claremont AM AW y �r JV Sierra Madre ey - DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL46, .. MAXIMUM BEING ANALYZED ............•... C.°TmM° A1..1A ConamaMon Area 16 (5]9 Does) • Neighborhood Development Area Potential iifz,ales Open Space/Conservation±490 acres I N as�o t� a TOWN CENTERNEIGMBON000 Utility Easement ±143 acres Developable Area ±579 acres .7, a Total Site Area ±1,212acres a - ii ;- Come d.. Area )A • Dwelling Unit Total: 3,807 i (1920OeC1 • DUA Average (Net) 6.57 ` „/' S;a e, • DUA Average (Gross) 3.14398a f • Non -Residential 280,000 s.f. r _ 40 OO1e" T SIN] * All totals subject to approved zoning and entitlement/ mitigation plans and agreements - l$ N . THE PUBLIC REALM WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD STRUCTURE • Streets orient and connect to open spaces framing views of nature and mountains ■ Neighborhoods with 5-minute walking distance from center to edge. • Pedestrian -scale blocks, interconnected street network, off-street trails ■ Every household within a comfortable, safe 5- minute walk of a small park or playground ■ Safe comfortable longer walk or bike ride to school and neighborhood shops. • Every home within a 5 minute walk of a walking/bike riding trail. .� e OPEN SPACE NETWORK NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND GREENS ■ A play area within a child's safe, comfortable 5-minute walk from every residence • Adjacent housing faces parks, does not back up to them • Each park supports multiple activities, including active informal play and quiet enjoyment �1%� V s �'. iv d� e � r. —y, *'SARGENT ..M T-J' ", " aNN�Ni. OPEN SPACE NETWORK NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND GREENS • A play area within a child's safe, comfortable 5-minute walk from every residence • Adjacent housing faces parks, does no' back up to them • Each park supports multiple activities, including active informal play and quiet enjoyment � h.A •aai 5 —y. "I SARGENT M TOWN P_4NNrNG OPEN SPACE NETWORK NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS - NEIGHBORHOOD FOCAL POINTS E i `'ew �NSARGENT 04 Tn N', i..4NhN•a. OPEN SPACE NETWORK NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS - FOCAL POINTS (.R ,:� ��,, pj SARGENT s T �► , 1 ".r t L 1 40�- .Ir 'S 1 Y 1; OPEN SPACE NETWORK LANDSCAPE CALIBRATED TO CLIMATE AND LOCAL HABITAT is c 51SARGENT .. _... _.N. h R is i t /'fOWN, �t -3 STREET NETWORK MASTER PLAN OF STREETS Improved Arterials Neighborhood Avenues Wilson Main Street Neighborhood Streets Neighborhood Edge Drives --- Neighborhood Edge Lanes OPEN SPACE NETWORK TRAIL SYSTEM i ���aprt•..IT m- ... OPEN SPACE NETWORK LARGE OPEN SPACESALONG NEIGHBORHOODSTO EAST [ct= NORTH EASTEPN SPHERE ANNEXATION $PEON- PLAN OPEN SPACE NETWORK TRAILS ALONG FLOOD CONTRODUTILITY CORRIDORS �a SARGENT CH\' TO'NN✓i NNWI. JFv"' T - M, J JA'.( �s^' �lFifrvb . —7 OEM- PLANNING SUB -AREAS PLAN STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION ■ Wilson Village Center— mixed -use center • Wilson Neighborhood — mixed housing types • Wilson Heights — single family, some attached some larger lot ■ College Center— mixed housing types and small commercial center ■ Milliken Heights — single family detached large lot homes • Southwest and Southeast Neighborhoods — mixed housing types, including some attached �j CONSERVATION - i- WIESON HEIGHTS _ HEIGHTS MILA" VVILSON F =, f COLLIE i i CONSERVATION - W-ag T H ,m � 3 i c o i Am o� 1 isnwrx� IO-, T �. r, MIXED -USE VILLAGE CENTER THE GENERAL IDEA WE ARE SUGGESTING w y Y f�vil 1 u .1J �.i ' ^T ._ �1 9r' .11, •,fit. �. �. _ � � �1 � Ti* 40 . t _ Y Y� y '1K �` ` �=�y� '" v + �iLx �i•iy :. % - II I Illlll��r _ F r MIXED -USE VILLAGE MALAGA COVE, RANCHO PALOSVERDES, CA �Itti �'�SARGENT WILSON VILLAGE CENTER RANCHO SANTA FEVILLAGE CENTER -:Fl AFP��,-- Pi.;. I r' 1 < WILSON VILLAGE CENTER WILSON MAIN STREET ILLUSTRATION R•� I' IgSARGENT ��` �� TON'. �-LANNING WILSON VILLAGE CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD AVENUE ILLUSTRATION WILSON VILLAGE CENTER NEW SKETCH OFVILLAGE CENTER ass SA RG E N T M! T, A , r_A�r� r.,_. WILSON VILLAGE CENTER SOUTH PROMENADE ILLUSTRATION Ail WILSON VILLAGE CENTER VILLAGE CENTER ILLUSTRATIVE FRAMEWORK PLAN A, 414% M a N UP T , E T - I "1 5 A,,,,j CX A T ��- N SPI -- I F PLAN SARGENT T,�A:l I.ANNINI, WILSON NEIGHBORHOOD PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL ■ Single family detached and limited attached types. ■ Some alley -loaded some not ■ Focus on views of mountains and valley and connection to edge lanes and trails -.-� $ARC. ENT WILSON NEIGHBORHOOD COURTYARD HOUSING 11 R Npo (h�;nuoaw M . - [c PL Sl_.. 4 �-�se-� SF::_ P,_n.. �o SA RGE NT f WILSON NEIGHBORHOOD DUPLEX I TRIPLEX I QUADPLEX I MULTIPLEX w f lk �� tberaucn NJ1-1 Ec- r,, S,nEr A_ 4x a'o -; SPE❑VC P�eN I r il o I oil MAW ♦Ti..yAll gyp.. _ y -�f i WILSON NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD AVENUE ILLUSTRATION x 4k 1 r �( WILSON NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD AVENUE ILLUSTRATION Aak in Li;cne�atwavcn N ;-.. E ;:, Sa-;e= A _.. .-. Ne C. -.. PL..11 l.F=5w,7 'I WILSON NEIGHBORHOOD BASE OF SLOPE TO HEIGHTS 2 EA�T'P'l SpF-r ANIJCXATI�-N SrFZ F;, PLAN SARGENT -in 4il � , � f WILSON NEIGHBORHOOD TOP OF SLOPE IN HEIGHTS .. _Rwcwr �gSARGENT .+ (.5r.�uovcn NorEr Sr ERu SPH Er'F. An�ni[>.4 riG r, S==_CiFiC PLAni rr ro•nr: w_gNrviNG WILSON HEIGHTS LARGER LOT SINGLE FAMILY j _ •I v_I L p`w t 1 (F QN N-A �yv ..:l a 4,7i-u^fa. JC`; b f� dIi J ' WILSON HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD STREET ILLUSTRATION (TYPICAL MOST NEIGHBORHOODS) W"SARGENT C R�cw{IdM04 .1 'v - ME TOWN v:..ANNING MILLIKEN HEIGHTS LARGER LOTVIEW HOMES • Range from 1 to 4 dua • Houses on lots 80+ feet wide • Large -lot single-family houses Neighborhood parks and greens; HOA-maintained ft.­� r4.es s~ MILLIKEN HEIGHTS INCLUDING CUSTOM/SEMI-CUSTOM HOMES (1SFi♦[a.. A,;, j, v a si aiJnr P�R'++ SP Rl. u MILLIKEN HEIGHTS _ Park and pedestrian connection to west Multi -purpose trail and linear park around flood control channel Neighborhood edge lane along Central Preserve C AOR", I'll r�1SARGENT �IAMOk@ I_.. �..-.:_ .-. SGF__ G'.._ FLc,.I Yf ME P'_All" r11 MILLIKEN HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD STREET ILLUSTRATION ® _,,.� _ �nsPacr: cn�roucn N�i���. E�� �::-.EF A. 5--�'�v; P�>u '':: rJT r Ile. t}} ''�`-✓...+..�'''�'" ter' r _ °' � 4 1 .--t�• 4 ♦R - - - s I xec t✓ Tz ! iy J qy, i f •Y -, i y„r COLLEGE CENTER MIXED NEIGHBORHOOD AND SMALL CENTER ■ Small center around roundabout and park ■ Walking distance to college, small office and "maker space" and or live -work ■ Mix of attached and detached housing Ck .. - y Mr re p10• i a � i t�P �i �� nl ....� �ih� i i ` - "�` �F COLLEGE CENTER MIXED NEIGHBORHOOD AND SMALL CENTER ■ Small commercial center • Courtyard condos �° ` • Multiplex condos - Rowhouses/live-work44 Single family detachedNil S k rF PA �n+axi NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED RESIDENTIAL ONLY • Single family detached and attached types. ■ Some alley -loaded some not • Edges are designed as transitions to adjacent neighborhoods and natural habitat. J EAST AND WEST NEIGHBORHOODS NEIGHBORHOOD EDGE DRIVE Mom SARGENT (l= NGR?H EAST -RN SPr+eeE An: Nex gncN SPeuvr_ PLAN MEM TJ'JJ r, p.ANNI\f, EAST AND WEST NEIGHBORHOODS NEIGHBORHOOD EDGE DRIVE a,,uu„��� .. NEIGHBORHOOD MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL ONLY • Single family detached only — 6 to 8 DUA Some alley -loaded some not • Intended to substantially match adjoining neighborhoods RURAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT HOUSING CLUSTERS WITH RURAL ROADS + CONSERVATION 12••�:�a, - iii SARG E N T RURAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT VARIAN RANCH, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CA e r o a _ .-. _ i00.SARGENT /� � : «y�� .}-��» �»G� �. � �� � t� �> \ � � � °� � \ � .tea\ �>� ��\§ � � ©� QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION �Z�an '��SARGENT