The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2017-10-25 - SupplementalsPre -Application Workshop October 25. 2017 Empire Lakes/The Resort "Phase 1(B)" Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00697 Van Daele Homes, Inc. Project Description A mixed use development consisting of 296 single-family residential units consisting of bungalows, townhomes, and flats on a property consisting of multiple parcels with a combined area of 16.7 acres within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1. rrr ] ( L j ." w.i,iGi .-•j _ '. 'tom' _'— ._ BNSF/Metrolin—k Rail,Gine orb C _ 1 _ -;H Empire Lakes , Acacia Str et Specific Plan is r: F t ;th •Street 6thgStreet " C p _ 't .. .. Empire Lakes Specific Plan , c 4 h ,S leet 4th.Street y-.•= w j ,,',� • ,,-lri.M�j'ii 1�'r.;?t B4 r tf _ 46 IA BNSF/Mi5tirolink-Rail Lin%e—Sk--' 3 Wtnolink E wz CucamongaLN Stan .1 m1t Fl R. Poncho w _ m In rmwuc NU C4 0 U13 N N_ *01 zt, North orth ey fit me 52. Pod" Puft t—e �w�7th,"§' Ir Rhin, � JVIA Mir i Urbw Plea i4. .. - . sr � 6th Stree fF "dr. 7 South PkaffiblP LaplW UPbmNsoboM (URQ 64 KU ""NsqAbvtoetlfvw AIL Street- Urban PIS%All _ r3th Strut S 23" low _ RFC. South -2a ,(rjA� :i RtC. 5.22 3 Cl !O_ Ar- CL %ft AC 4 MAC Packde VW 5-15 � �� uxdaAC IaM >e \ -21 �=a Project Site VN S-20 - VN Placebype Lege rid are AC' 1+xa.CAr �Tmnsit 17.1 hi Ixed Use (MU) ' Urban Ne4 berhocd (UN) Cor*e Living (CL) �C V11bw �NeighborWjod (VN) .MU Ij �Recr�atlon(REC) nu iw u 1' fK�MU r"h^erby J - — 40 strut Unit Quantities and Floor Areas 296 single-family residential units as follows: • 99 bungalows (1,464-1,536 square feet) • 80 townhomes (1,497-1,715 square feet) • 117 stacked flats 11178-17731 square feet Building/Unit Information Building -F Type umber of Buildings Number of Stories Architectural Theme Number of Interpretations Number of Floor Plans Bungalow 99 21,2 Spanish 53 3 Townhome Heritage 4- lex 7 3 25 4 5- lex 5 3 25 3 + 2 reverse 6- lex 1 3 25 3 + 2 reverse 7- lex 3 3 25 3 Stack Flat 13 3 Contemporary 24 5 Plan 1 is a "carriage unit"; 2three floors when including the 31d floor option for Plan 3; 3 not including the Yd floor option for Plan 3; 4 change in color scheme only; 5 assumed as no elevations for these buildings were provided L WATER EFFICIEM EANO "E WORRSHEET RwNbxYl Wat+Pa PruMt]e aA� ► cl-lYELT;L'&�L^,s —Yj ® RESEPFO114: aHIi I'aCFES IA-XBc. Oa-N'B[a qa .4 W VAN DAELE HOMES THE RESORT-corvcEPrwi. urvnsuRnnsrER RAry RantF• Cuu m•n F. 4. PLANT PALETTE sRm�es SNo cRovucwcR TREE6 yglac Q EVEAPGFII xtQOK1� fxEE ® ixRpg161NEE1 MEE � r INm M.o' .HUE/ Ndn Yen 9mN.Ilnr N4Ya/waElu]ISW 4NFYMa frabmM mmnM1 iTYe+ l•SiWFL'iIYAWRM'J SIISEI IRE � - JHWf /.YARIVYl4E �YYe�mbem�Y CIX;YIMK[EMTIH � RW yry1W PrrPu ttYv��. WPYOr IWViw '-NYE RPrtA694dExiRE ' • E OKrm laenEra•� MUlLRQ4EWMUKL(Mr IRE u<�Y-hmELanNJ Ntt�N�iiRE ,Ya,y ipamraEr TYYpr' Gp Wb PWft•'Mrm NY Yry Pov GPo'.RIH(:4YER r O 9W.LLKQAFI IRE V4541NpGV41RPN 4MYra LLaNa nv+E'um�'^ NrrY. iYPu s.Y°a.r�°i� E14AtfEY19tNFbM6iRE W56 O�emYrlY t�M � 14r.Yru m.Yee BtlamW S®rJb - T H E V I N E -1 T-1 L / � FEATURE LEGEND: � Yvf 9YlaP.NCH. ] GNrrnpY <M1eYeIP[amliya9 mi rbtQYiYi4YY Sauab NFe Vle ] mlMsemaHlMb 9lYSaumaberYNel M1s4lFrw • Nm•irYaaY.Y/P�.YisiYt�arl.Yru Ytom Nu LAPKINIERWIM la 4 I�--pj t % �MVx MHawed YBva BW as CVNMr.hrte4Ye^YM sE.giga E 'V fnaY JrepMY. mPBdw.BebN etla�Wee� I�Pe ENn.iN e aY.wam•F..PSwv.Y[.Yeuaa E r.a.eb E..mmEYP.]�aEsgram.mnt u [bagn O.eaaapgePaen.Y Yt4 YEq �gea Hbnr Y � bs �1Y.rµ3a® Ofne CYNvp tEFelEb ]YYbmY®m r.wF.a WYIY E MFWY a411E0 'N;I"=. �� Ro.mBR'fWNGurOJm l4r•epma IE Fbj.AXjtNL ri tTr(N hb'/IrE V EYYylWvswEeumYM1ee Y ImmrE]Nmalv�m JII -- - t,=- Bassenianlagom oHE nRESORT�- BUNGALOWS-'SPANISH' „ MMM oh.aa-N Rancho Cucamonga, CA 111.13116 VAN DAELE Basaenian;L.grig THE RESORTa - BUNGALOWS - 'SPANISH' n.ncne w..menp, a.n 111.1)116 VAN ALE l ._. Bassenian Laganil THE RESORT -BUNGALOWS -'SPANISH' _ c....rua n.•n.n•.. or.. s..., s.n.— c 521 I? Ill u�Q.aa. n A9\ VAN DAnL 1 1 �Xa 000 000 Rioi ol , _. a'wa JatJNAll, r% _-"- a= Ripqpw Ilk a - r r rw v ir AQ a r sre ® .,,,,,.—......... „ FEHR rPEERS D U D F K City Council Update AGENDA • Environmental background and setting • Overview of the last year's work. • Overview of Plan progression. • Summary of current vision plan. • Questions and input from the City Council CLl\\IU\41 NORTH EASTERN SPHERE ANNEXATION PROJECT PLAN OBJECTIVES 1. Permanent Conservation Permanent urban edge, preserving and restoring the sensitive natural habitats, resources, landscapes and &WITLYA 2. Fiscal Sustainability Avoid "patchwork" of fiscally unsustainable neighborhood fragments, prone to natural hazards (wildfires, landslides..) 3. A Center for North Rancho Cucamonga A walkable, bikeable destination with commercial amenities for surrounding neighborhoods, overlooking new preserve, trailhead to Foothills and civic amenities for the whole community. 4. Interconnected Walkable Neighborhoods Spectrum of housing options, from large lot view homes to smaller homes, attached homes, condos and apartments targeted to a broad range of household sizes and types. H. 1-1 c«t ..1,. I RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN KEY OBJECTIVES RELATEDTOTHIS 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 .01SARGENT ---------�;---------- --------------.----------- V I I I 1 - Conservation Priority Area - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- ------ - - � Ott Restoration _— Area<,, .gas— ..•.. s;�% ` � �-�'.. � �,. ` ,� �. C s CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS BACKGROUND AND SETTING " J-:,,leq DevelnPmen(- SpecJm Plan North Eastem Sphere AnnemWn Area Rancho Cucamonga Sphere or Influence PrNate Parcels AIRL LICnMLCAMO% a �! ONa� _ r c _ .., - �,�y: �,. �. _ a �,., . �' , f__. _. .. �. •: �•.,•,, t.. .K4 t l LuI � �: (s A �} '_ LOWER ALLUVIAL FAN OPEN SPACE RESOURCES LOWER QUALITY, DISCONNECTED, FLOOD PROTECTED, NO SBKR SBKR TRAPPING NONE PRESENT ■ All areas were considered low quality and disconnected from alluvial processes • Shrub cover is greater than preferred • Sandy substrate is generally lacking, trending toward patches of gravel and of loam • Focused trapping conducted in 41 areas, considered the most suitable SBKR habitat • 5,350 trap nights • No SBKR were trapped R-1h AREAS TARGETED FOR CONSERVATION • 3,176 Conservation Priority Area ---------------, ------------------------ ------ • 2015 Neighborhood ; ---- Conservation ; footprint ' Priority Area • 2016 Neighborhood } ( '` 1-----------, r----------------------------------- --- footprint • 2017 Neighborhood ; footprint under New Preserve ; environmental review 400-500 acres ; a• ENLARGE/RESTORE SMALL INTERMEDIATE WATERSHED ■ 7 small sub -watersheds between the very large Deer and Day Creek watersheds • Levee removal planned to allow portions of the flows from the westerly 3 sub - watersheds into the Development Priority Area PLAN PROGRESSION DEVELOPMENT PRIORITY AREA — 1,212 AC ■ 2015 Neighborhood Plan ■ 2016 Increased Conservation Plan ■ Current Plan — Based on series of meetings with regulatory agencies and extensive biological mapping and small mammal trapping • Existing rock levees provide pre -constructed wildfire protection for town center edges ■ New low -flow naturalistic channel to bring storm water flows into Central Preserve • Edge drives provide ecological and fire buffer — and emergency responder access L'.'SARGENT CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS OVERALL GOAL ........._........ Conserve a connected system of biologically viable habitat lands to reclaim natural processes and protect sensitive species. • Develop a preserve system that will enhance, protect and maintain ecosystem functions and values. Provide a consistent regulatory process that allows for efficient permitting of residential and commercial development in appropriate locations. Maintain scenic beauty, natural biological diversity, and compatible recreational opportunities to enhance the local quality of life. isw¢ a rd _.., 1:.,,�., A,.::, ,,:-.,_:, Sa�._�::_ P.. NSARGENT me CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS SPECIFIC BIOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES Protect the following habitats and listed species they support: ■ Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) • San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (SBKR) ■ California Gnatcatcher ■ Parry's Spineflower • Underlying natural fluvial processes (hydrology) Aft C:L- .. �um.1.1 __.. H RGENT CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS CONSERVATION AREA DESIGN PRINCIPLES 1. Keep habitat contiguous 2. Create larger preserves 3. Keep preserve areas close 4. Link blocks of habitat 5. Create diverse preserves L 7 0 • Conserve target species throughout the area Maintain natural processes 4- Protect preserves from encroachment rt ZAVII\4A •�>-NC,ENT CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES 1. Conserve and restore habitat and fr ecosystem functions and values within ------------ the 3,176 acre CPA in perpetuity. ti --- Conservation a. Annex North Eastern Sphere of Influence '- Priority Area �_:. i r------------------------- - ' Area to provide comprehensive land use control and management ' b. Redesignate upper 3,176 acres as a Conservation Priority Area and rezone to Open Space — Conservation ---____- c. Establish conservation/mitigation fee program within the 1,212-acre DPA to fund conservation and restoration d. Provide active habitat management of entire conservation area CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES 2. Restore habitat and ecosystem functions and values within 400-500 acres of the DPA and conserve those in perpetuity. a. Redesignate the 400-500 acres of mixed habitat for conservation and zone these Open Space — Conservation. b. Re-create habit and re-establish areas of RAFSS and chaparral to foster the natural distribution of plant and animal species by maintaining suitable habitat c. Preserve watershed, vegetation, soils and drainage courses in as natural a condition as possible to re- establish and maintain water quality and hydrological processes previously altered by human activity CPA (3,176 acres) Upper Preserve DPA ; (1,2 2 arrep) � 1 SARGENT -=, MY.'4 'IANN!M1C. CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES 3. Reclaim natural fluvial processes within the central DPA to restore, to the extend feasible, pre - flood -control habitat, biodiversity, and ecosystem health. a. Remove approximately 1,500 linear feet of the west tip of the Day Creek levee to re-establish water flows and sand deposition. b. Remove additional old diversion berms and roadways to re-establish flows from the foothills to lower alluvial fan c. Construct a naturalistic low flow channel to conduct storm water flows and sediment to lower alluvial fan d. Ensure that the existing level of flood protection is maintained to protect existing and future development from flood hazard k. „ SARGE NT _0 . ." i. a . yf1M,t Ji�YY "J 4VJd\!` YDiYa yell f � •y r.,a ;,� . . f.. ,,,^,� ln-..�-.:. t »' _ .�--•may:, _., 'i.f'TM'.�.. CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES 4. Conserve existing and create new opportunities for movement and genetic exchange of native organisms by linking existing and new habitat conservation areas. a. The approximately 135 acres of existing utility easements dual function as wildlife corridors. b. The approximately 104-acre utility corridor along the eastern boundary connects to CPA c. The DPA and CPA open space will be connected by a single block of preserved open space with 2 bridges passing over habitat d. Removal of the westernmost portion of the levee will also provide a new/expanded corridor for wildlife movement G 44Q4G MENSARGENT CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS DUAL FUNCTION WILDLIFE/UTILITY CORRIDORS k,w.�� (;ir_uunce . F.: �. - ,. .. „�!SARG ENT CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES 5. Contribute to and maximize the recovery and protection of endangered, threatened and sensitive species a. Within the DPA, re-establish areas of RAFSS and chaparral where connecting flow channels are created to enhance biodiversity b. After land -form modifications are complete, provide substrate modifications to increase habitat resources for SBKR c. Once disturbed areas are restored with appropriate soils and substrate, revegetate with native species d. Maintain species diversity through seed introductions and seed banking where diversity and cover are lacking aft }j�urax� /' 5 A RG E N T Qrcnuosce .� _ _ . CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES 6. Establish a Monitoring and Adaptive Maintenance Program (MAMP) to provide unified management of 3,659 conservation acres. a. Provide guidance for a responsible Habitat Management Entity to implement the Conservation and Restoration Program. b. Goals of the MAMP shall include long-range sustainability of vegetation communities, including: ■ Weed and Non -Native Plant Management • Fire Management/Fuel Modification Areas • Post -Flood Management ■ Public Access and Trail Management • Seed Banking Program k"1- Le UI SBKR-Habitat Management Program ��,:., '81SARGENT 21 ... CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES 7. Provide compatible recreational and educational opportunities within the SP area to enhance the quality of life of the public. a. A network of public trails will be provided along designated routes, managed in accordance with the MAMP, providing controlled educational and recreational uses. b. A public access and trail management plan will be developed including trail design, maintenance, signage/education outreach, lighting, viewing areas with Interpretive Sites for education c. Existing trails and dirt roads shall establish the backbone for the system (,icauuwn - r! CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS RECREATIONAL / EDUCATION TRAIL NETWORK Trails Regional MuIG-Purpose Traits The Regional Muni -Purpose Trails are the bzckboneolthepubllc Vallsystem. Theyare reserved dngdrstarre cocrieors, and selve as Me main connections in Community parks. scenic canyons. Me National Forest, major open spaces, resklemal, conan"N, and irdushmi areas These trials meanly follow aaad cumtrol charres am uakty condors They are intended as equestrian, pecesman. and! bicycle Iraos. CommunityTrails Community Trails provde pail users access to mmmunay facilities sea as denim. aclrools, and ninghborhood shopping centers. These public trails form loops of varying length and ad as Me link between me local tracer traits in each tract and the Regional Muni Purpose Trails system. Canmundy Trails follow soeels, tidily condors, and eesemenls- They are mlended for equestrian eIM pedestrian users, except equestrian usage is limited to the EquestriaNRural area Trail Connectrons and Trail Heads O Evsting Trail Head • Proposed Trail Head p Bridge ® Existing Grade Separation ® Proposed Grade Separation EquesblaNRu al Area Overlay =N SF f.!It �^1T CONSERVATION OF FOOTHILL ENVIRONMENTS OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES 8. Ensure compatibility and minimize potential impacts of adjacent uses on conservation areas a. Design the interface between the conservation area and the neighborhoods to minimize impacts from human disturbance b. Provide walls, fences and signage to keep humans and pets out of the conservation area c. Provide landscape and lighting standards for edge drive ipk..,., buffers �:«w',1, v y '.,!VARGENT n n mireire f a Citizens Actionp mittee October 25, 2017 Associate Groups '. To: Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, Rancho Cucamonga CC: City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager CC: Chaffey Republican Two copies for the pubic record Women S Federated From: Linnie Drolet, Foothill Tax Payers Association, Alta Loma, CA Mountainview Republicans Subject: North Eastern Sphere Annexation Project (NESAP): Meeting 1, 10-26-2017 Redlands Tea Party Patriots Inland Empire Citizens Action Committee (IECAC) is a coalition of several groups in the Inland Empire. We reject the San Bernardino Countywide Vision Chino Tea Party and have signed resolutions condemning this because it embraces the pro- : gressive agenda of sustainable development (SD); hence, it embraces central- Banning- Beaumont, : ized planning as evidenced in the Southern California Association of Cher,y Valley Tea Party : Governments (SCAG) Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which are recommendations being used by cities, counties and unelected Councils of Freedom Tea Party Governments (GOGs) and stakeholder groups across the State. Proposed Patriots developments in the annex region are SD programs. Redlands Town Hall Republicans High Desert Tea Party The platform of the Republican National Committee and California Norco-Corona-Eastnale Republican Party are opposed to the agenda of sustainability and sus - Tea Party tainable development. The San Bernardino Republican Central Committee has a resolution opposing this agenda. Republicans need to Foothill Tax Payers be aware of this because if they support for these kinds of programs, Association they will opposing their party. Victor Valley Freedom Campaign Democrats With the recent passage of the gas tax and subsequent passage of cap & trade adding direct costs to consumers of 75 cents with ensuing fee increases for vehicle registration, Democrats have lost their narrative on Climate. Change. The foundation for Climate Change is social justice to help the poor. Democrats can no longer make the social justice argument. 1 We realize that this series of meetings are apolitical; however, we felt com- pelled to respond because there is considerable pushback in many cities and communities regarding sustainable development. Furthermore, since cli- mate change has been politicized, cities need to be aware of this. For exam- ple, the current adminstration has: • Pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord • Proposed removing renewable energy tax credits. • 100% Repeal Obama Clean Power Plan Why is this important? Grant money is going to dry up. The Sustainable Development industry relies heavily on grant money for consultants, stakeholders and developers involved in this scheme. North Eastern Sphere Annexation (NESAP): Questions & Comments The meeting notification flyer states: "Initial design considerations propose..." This indicates staff's assumption that this annexation is areadly a done deal. 1. Why has staff moved ahead before annexation been approved? 2. How much staff time has been expended on this project(s) already? 3. Has a consultant been hired and what is the amount of the contract(s)? Please forward copies of the contract(s). Conservation Priority Area "Initial proposals considerations propose maintaining the northerly 2,915 acres as a conservation priority area." Initial proposals? 4. What does "priority area" mean in this context? 5. Who and/or what groups made this conservation proposal? 6. Please identify all players, stakeholders involved with the proposal, includ- ing nonprofit groups, foundations and their contact information. 7. Is the area identified already a conservation area, if so, what entity made the designation and under what authority? 8. Why would the taxpayers want to annex and take on the burden of main- 2 taining this new conservation area? 9. Please provide an estimate of all costs of operating and maintaining this area. Sustainable Development Language used in the promotion flyer indicates that projects considered for this parcel would contain sustainability elements. This is denoted by the statement: "...public uses and amenities arranged in a compact and walkable land use pattern to encourage active living." Therefore, it appears that funds have already been expended for proposals that socially engineer residents into a sustainable community:high-density, bicycle, walkable oriented development, promoting minimum vehicle usage. These developments are typically high -density: A.Transit Oriented Development (TOD), which requires a mass -transit ele- ment. If so, 10. What is the transportation element and what are the proposed costs? B. Completes Streets Development 11. What is the ratio of single family homes to high -density apartments/con- dos proposed? High -density development stresses school capacity and fire/police services. 12. What are the impacts costs for these services? Increased traffic? 13. What are the proposed increases in property taxes needed to added bur- den for sustainabe development proposals? 14. Finally, why are you having four outreach meetings whan it appears that you have already decided to annex this parcel in advance? We assume that these meeting will be facilitated consensus meeting; where- by, you will seek input from the "community'. However, our experience has been any "options" presented are outcome- based, meaning that develop- ment proposals have been predetermined in advance and any "Choice" resi- dents make is already approved by the city. OPPOSE - This is a property rights issue. Oppose this annexation because of conservation and priority development constraints. The land, as encum- bered is a libility, not an asset. 3