HomeMy WebLinkAbout19-083 - Resolution RESOLUTION NO. 19-083
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00749 IN CONNECTION WITH THE
ETIWANDA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONSERVATION
PLAN AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF
A. Recitals.
1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "City") prepared the Etiwanda Heights
Neighborhood and Conservation Plan (EHNCP) DRC2015-00751 as a specific plan (the"Specific
Plan")to regulate development in an area comprising approximately 4,393 acres extending roughly
from Haven Avenue easterly to the City's boundary with Fontana,and from the northerly City limits to
the San Bernardino National Forest boundary that is largely in the City's Sphere of Influence (the
"Project Area"). The Project Area is more particularly described in Section 2.2 of the Specific Plan.
2. The City has caused to be prepared General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00749 (the
"General Plan Amendment"), attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this
reference, in order to incorporate the Specific Plan into the City's land use policies and designations.
The General Plan Amendment would: (1) establish density limits within the Specific Plan's
Neighborhood and Rural/Conservation Areas; (2) establish the land use designation of"specific
plan" for the Neighborhood Area and apply the Rural/Conservation Area's sub-zones in their
respective portions of the Project Area; (3)establish new City boundaries upon annexation into the
City of the 4,088 acres within the Project Area that are currently in the City's Sphere of Influence;
and (5) modify various language, text, tables, and figures in Chapter 2: Managing Land Use,
Chapter 3: Community Mobility, Chapter 4: Economic Development, 5: Community Services, 6:
Resource Conservation, 7: Public Facilities and Infrastructure, 8: Public Health and Safety, and 9:
Housing, to allow the future development under the Specific Plan consistent with the General Plan.
3. On July 24, 2019,the Planning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing on the
General Plan Amendment and continued the hearing to August 28, 2019.
4. On August 28,2019,the Planning Commission re-opened the duly noticed public hearing
on the General Plan Amendment, concluded the hearing on that date, and thereafter, among other
actions, adopted Resolution No. 19-53, recommending that the City Council approve the General
Plan Amendment.
5. On October 2, 2019, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
General Plan Amendment and concluded the hearing on that date.
6. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW,THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. Recitals. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
Resolution No. 19-083 - Page 1 of 5
2. CEQA. The EHNCP, the General Plan Amendment, and the associated approvals
(collectively, the "Project") have been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Local
CEQA Guidelines. The City prepared an Initial Study and, based on the information contained in the
Initial Study, concluded that there was substantial evidence that the Project might have a significant
environmental impact on certain resources. Based upon the information contained in the Initial
Study and other technical reports and evidence, the City prepared an EIR for the Project in order to
analyze the Project's potential impacts on the environment. A Draft EIR was prepared and
circulated for public review and comment, and a Final FEIR was reviewed by the City Council. By
separate Resolution No. 19-082, the City Council has: (i) made the required CEQA findings and
determinations, (ii) certified the Final EIR;(iii)adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations and
(d)adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project. Resolution No. 19-082 is
incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. The documents
and other materials that constitute the record on which this determination was made are located in
the Planning Department and are in the custody of the Planning Director. Further, the mitigation
measures set forth therein are made applicable to the Project.
3. Findings. Based upon all available evidence presented to the City Council during the
above-referenced public hearing on October 2, 2019, including written and oral staff reports,
together with public testimony, the City Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. Much of the Project Area is currently within unincorporated San Bernardino
County, with a small portion located within the City's limits. Specifically, 4,088 acres of the Project
Area are located within the City's Sphere of Influence and 305 acres lie within the City.
Approximately 3,494 acres of the Project Area, including portions within the City's Sphere of
Influence, are governed by the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, adopted by the City in 1992.
b. Development of the unincorporated portion of the Project Area in the City's
sphere of influence is currently governed by the San Bernardino County General Plan and zoning
regulations,with various portions of the Project Area designated as Resource Conservation,Single
Residential, Rural Living, Special Development Residential, Open Space, Institutional, and
Floodway under the County General Plan. The portion of the Project Area currently within the City is
regulated by the City's General Plan, the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, or both.
C. The EHNCP's Specific Plan is comprised of two planning areas: (1) the
Rural/Conservation Area generally located north of the Day Creek Diversion Levee to the San
Bernardino National Forest boundary and east from Haven Avenue to the City limits; and (2) the
Neighborhood Area located south of the Day Creek Diversion Levee to the 210 Freeway and east
from the Day Creek Channel past Milliken Avenue. The General Plan Amendment is intended to
incorporate these two planning areas by,among other things, amending applicable density limits for
the areas and establishing land use designations for them.
d. The Rural/Conservation Area comprises approximately 3,603 acres within the
Project Area and is subject to development standards and strategies intended to conserve and
manage the areas as open space. Up to 100 residential units could be developed within the
Rural/Conservation Area under the proposed development standards, with a Transfer of
Development Rights(TDR)program that would allow property owners to transfer development rights
for up to 300 residential units from the Rural/Conservation area to the Neighborhood Area. The City
Council supports the Specific Plan's goal of preserving the foothills that comprise the
Rural/Conservation Area as open space, along with the standards and strategies intended to
achieve that goal.
Resolution No. 19-083 - Page 2 of 5
e. The Neighborhood Area comprises approximately 790 acres within the
Project Area and is subject to development standards intended to promote appropriate and well-
designed residential, limited commercial,and recreational development. The Specific Plan permits
up to 2,700 residential units in the Neighborhood Area, which may be expanded to 3,000 units
depending on property owner participation in the TDR program. Among other amenities, the
Neighborhood Area includes a trail network that builds upon the City's existing trail network as
identified in the General Plan and Trail Implementation Plan. Development within the Neighborhood
Area is intended to help generate funds to support open space conservation within the
Rural/Conservation Area. The City Council finds that the Neighborhood Area is well designed and
planned and will help promote the Rural/Conservation Area as open space.
f. The City Council has independently reviewed the General Plan Consistency
Analysis attached as Exhibit Q to the City Council staff report and included as Table 4.10-2 in the
EIR. Based on this comprehensive consistency analysis and other evidence in the record,the City
Council finds that the General Plan Amendment is internally consistent with all other General Plan
goals, policies and implementation programs. This finding is more specifically supported by the
following evidence:
i. The General Plan Amendment would limit development within the
EHNCP Specific Plan's Rural/Conservation Area, consistent with the City's conservation goals, as
outlined in the General Plan's Resource Conservation Element and including Goal RC-1
("Encourage stewardship of natural open space areas, environmentally sensitive lands, and
agricultural resources")and its associated policies.
ii. The General Plan Amendment would make way for the
implementation of the EHNCP Specific Plan. The EHNCP Specific Plan's Neighborhood Area is
well designed and planned and will help promote the Rural/Conservation Area as open space. This
is consistent with General Plan Goal LU-9 ("Foster a cohesive, healthy community through
appropriate patterns and scales of development, including complementary transitions between
districts, neighborhoods, and land uses") and its associated policies.
g. For the reasons described in this Resolution, approval of the General Plan
Amendment is in the public interest and would not be materially injurious or detrimental to adjacent
properties.
h. The findings set forth in this Resolution reflect the independent judgment of
the City Council.
4. Decision. On the basis of the foregoing and all of the evidence in the administrative
record before it, the City Council hereby adopts General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00751,
attached hereto as Exhibit"A." The General Plan Amendment shall take effect on the effective date
of the ordinances implementing Zoning Map Amendment DRC2015-00752 and Development Code
Amendment DRC2019-00459.
5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Resolution No. 19-083 - Page 3 of 5
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of October, 2019.
L. Dennis Michael, ayor
ATTEST:
avzu Zoo 416"
nice C. Reynolds, CI rk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the
City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a Regular Meeting of said Council held on
the 2nd day of October 2019.
AYES: Hutchison, Kennedy, Michael, Scott, Spagnolo
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
Executed this 3rd day of October, 2019, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
rice C. Reynolds, Clerk
Resolution No. 19-083 - Page 4 of 5
Exhibit A
General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00749
Resolution No. 19-083 - Page 5 of 5
Table LU-3; Build-Out Summary
Baseline:2009' General Plan Build Out:2030 Change Percent
Ci Sole Total Cit S012 Total (total only) Change
city Y
Dwelling Units 55,608 91 55,699 62,196 1,057 63,253 7,554 13.6%
Population 179,200 300 1799500 200,400 3,400 203,800 24,300 13.5%
Non-Residential 80,030,000 0 80,0309000 99,797,000 0 99,797,000 19,767,000 24.7%
Square Feet
Employment 77,350 0 779350 103,040 0 103,040 25,690 33.2%
Notes:
1. 2009 Baseline data is based on Existing Land Use Geographical Information Systems land use data.
2. SOI:Rancho Cucamonga Sphere of Influence.
3. Does not include build out from the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood& Conservation Plan
Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources
RAN C H 0 CUCAMONGA GEN E RAL PLAN LU-33
Table LU4: Land Use Plan SummarrResidential Designations
City �hl
p Ar Sphere of Influ
Land Us+ Target T
Dwelling Dwelling Total Total Target
2 Dwelt�n Acres Z Dwelling Dwelling
Units Uni#s 3 Units Units 3 Acreag Units welling Units
Residential Designations
Hillside(0.1-2.0 du/ac) 1.29 133 13 to 268 151 695 70-1,400 831 828 83-1,668 982
Very Low(0.10-2.0 du/ac) 1.29 4,007 401 to 8,029 7,394 - - - 4,007 401-8,029 7,394
Low(2.0-4.0 du/ac) 3.25 4,371 9,194 to 18,080 18,050 - - - 4,371 9,194-18,080 18,050
Low Medium 6.50 1,852 7,739 to 15,100 13,320 - - - 7,739-15,100 13,320
(4.0-8.0 du/ac) 1,852
Medium(8.0-14.0 du/ac) 11.75 790 6,270 to 10,837 9,283 - - 790 6,270-10,837 9,283
Medium High W'H- � _
Medium
H du/ac) 20.25 367 5,237 to 8,915 7,432 - - 367 5,237-8,915 7,432
High(24.0-30.0 du/ac) 27.75 44 1,376 to 1,713 1,221 - - - 44 1,376-1,713 1,221
Mixed Use Varies 294 3,942 to 6,936 5,694 - - - 294 3,942-6,936 5,694
Open Space 0.10 483 0 to 48 - 2,496 0-250 226 2,979 0-298 226
(0.0-0.1 du/ac)
RESIDENTIAL SUBTOTAL 12,341 33,690 to 69,926 62,545 39191 70-19650 19057 159532 34,242-71,576 63,602
-mowi,
Notes:
1. The Density Factor is based upon actual development that has occurred in the City and represents a level midway between 50%and 75%of the range.it is used to calculate the target number of
dwelling units.This factor is only applied to vacant developable lands.A different Density Factor was applied to existing development to obtain an accurate baseline number.
2. The range of dwelling units is derived by multiplying the lower and upper threshold of density/intensity range by the number of acres, and rounded to the nearest whole number. This range
represents the theoretical potential.Some development will produce densities at or near the top of the range;however,most will not.
3. Target dwelling units is the probable level of development based on historical development patterns,except for Mixed Use Residential,which is based primarily on a target density.
4. Mixed Use allows both residential and non-residential uses.
5. Open Space is generally a non-residential category that permits a very limited number of residential units on privately owned properties. Within the City,Open Space applies to the golf courses
and the Pacific Electric Trail. In the northwest quadrant of the City, a few properties are designated Open Space and could yield residential units. However, any such development would be
limited to a density of 0.1 units per acre(or one unit per parcel on lots less than 10 acres in size)and would be subject to the slope,drainage,flood zones,and fault zone analysis at a minimum
under the Hillside Overlay Ordinance,further limiting any residential development potential.
6. Does not include build out from the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood&Conservation Plan.
Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources
LU-34 RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN
Table LU-5: Land Use Plan Summary-Non-Residential Designations
Square Feet Probable Square Feet 3
Employment
Land Use Designations ', (in thousands)' (in thousands) Total Acrell
(City Only) (City Only)
(City Only)
Non-Residential2
Office(0.40-1.0 FAR) 80 - 1,396 to 3,485 1,396 3,180 80
Neighborhood Commercial(0.25-0.35 FAR) 164 - 1,785 to 2,500 1,785 3,030 164
Community Commercial(0.25-0.35 FAR) 119 - 1,292 to 1,810 1,292 1,970 119
General Commercial(0.25-0.35 FAR) 446 - 6,220 to 6,799 6,220 10,020 446
SubtotalgOg _ 10,693 to 14,594 10,693, 18,200 809
.
Mixed Use(0.25-1.0 FAR)4 667 _ 6,923 to 27,699 12,757 20,270 667
Subtotal fifi7 - 6,498 to 250996 129757 20,270 667
jndustriai Park 0.40-0.60,FAR) 559 - 9,739 to 14,610 9,739 6,610 559
-Haven Overlay(0.40-1.0 FAR) 202 - 3,518 to 8,798 3,518 7,950 202
General Industrial(0.50-0.60 FAR) 1,974 - 42,993 to 51,592 42,993 29,220 1,974
Heavy Industrial(0.40-0.50 FAR) 891 - 15,523 to 19,405 15,523 15,820 891
-
"' 71'773 to 94,405
Subtotal 3,626 - 71,773 59,600 3,626
Open Space(0.0-0.10 u ac} 483 2,496 - - 2,979
Conservation 353 983 - - - 1,336
Flood Control/Utility Corridor-, 11711 11753 - - - 3,464
s Subtotal 29547 5,232 - - 7,779
Civic/Regional(0.40-1.0 FAR) 130 - 2,265 to 5,662 2,265 1,050 130
Schools(0.10-0.20 FAR) &� 558 - 2,430 to 4,861 2,430 3,920 558
Parks 445 - - - _
445
Subtotal''' 11133 - 4,695 to 10,523 4,695 4,970 1,133
ON-RESIDENTI 4L SUBTOTAL 81784 51232 94.084 to 147,221 95,223 103,040 149016
Notes:
1. The range of square footage is derived by multiplying the probable lower and upper threshold of intensity range by the number of acres, and rounded to the nearest
hundred.
Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources
RANCHO CUCAMONGA GEN E RAL PLAN LU-35
2. Non-residential FAR Range: lower number is the probable FAR on average, but in some cases it may be lower. Higher number is the maximum FAR allowed for any
specific project.
3. Employment is calculated by using the Probable Square Feet and employment factors for each non-residential land use designations.
4. Mixed Use allows both residential and non-residential use.
5. Does not include build out from the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood&Conservation Plan.
Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources
LU-36 RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN
Table LU-6: Build Out Summary by Land Use
�
Acres Target Dwelling Units Probable Non-Residential
Land sDesignationsPercent (City Only)
La d U e of Total Square Feet
citySO otal city SOI Total Employment
(in thousands)
, L----!M Lf
Hillside Residential(0.1-2.0 du/ac) 133 695 828 3.1% 151 831 982 -
Very Low Residential(0.1-2.0 du/ac) 4,007 - 4,007 15.1% 7,394 - 7,394 - -
Low Residential(2.0-4.0 du/ac) 4,371 - 4,371 16.5% 18,050 - 18,050 -
Low Medium Residential(4.0-8.0 du/ac) 11852 - 1,852 7.0% 13,320 - 13,320 - -
Medium Residential(8.0-14.0 du/ac) 790 - 790 3.0% 9,283 - 9,283 - -
Medium High Residential(14.0-24.0 du/ac) 367 - 367 1.4% 7,432 - 7,432 - -
High Residential(24.0-30.0 du/ac) 44 - 44 0.2% 1,221 - 1,221 - -
Mixed Use 961 - 961 3.6% 5,694 - 5,694 12,755 20,270
Office(0.40-1.0 FAR)x 80 - 80 0.3% - - - 1,393 3,180
Neighborhood Commercial(0.25-0.35 FAR) 164 - 164 0.6% - - - 1,785 3,030
Community Commercial(0.25-0,35 FAR) 119 - 119 0.4% - - - 1,292 1,970
General Commercial(0.25-0.35 FAR) 446 - 446 1.7% - - - 6,220 10,020
Industrial Park(0.40-0.60 FAR) j 559 - 559 2.1% - - - 9,739 6,610
-Haven Ave Office Overlay(0.40-1.0 FAR) 202 - 202 0.8% - - - 3,518 7,950
General Industrial(0.50-0.60 FAR) 1,974 - 1,974 7.4% - - - 42,993 29,220
Heavy Industrial(0.40-0.50 FAR). 891 - 891 3.4% - - - 15,523 15,820
Open Space(0.0-0.1 du/ac) ,"9_MWN=_, : 483 2,496 2,979 11.2% - 226 226 - -
Conservation 353 983 1,336 5.0% - - - - -
Flood Control/Utility Corridor 1,711 1,753 3,464 13.0% - - - - -
Civic/Regional 0.40-1.0 FAR) 130 - 130 0.5% - - - 2,265 1,050
Schools 0 10-0.20 FARC 558 - 558 2.1% - - - 2,430 3,920
�.-
Parks 445 - 445 1.7% - - - - -
GRAND TOTAL: 99,914 103,040
Notes:
1. Acres include existing development and undeveloped vacant properties.
2. Mixed Use allows both residential and non-residential uses.
3. Does not include build out from the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood& Conservation Plan
Managing Land Use, Community Design,and Historic Resources
RAN C H O CUCAMONGA G E N E RAL PLAN
LU-37
tremendous opportunity for Rancho Cucamonga to maintain its leadership in the
environmental arena.
The vision for this focus area includes:
■ Concentrating heavy industrial uses
■ Supporting infrastructure improvements to attract industrial, manufacturing,
and green technology uses
■ Preventing encroachment of conflicting uses that would diminish the utility of
the area for heavy industry
Hillsides
The Hillside Focus Area is ' , adjacent to
Rancho Cucamonga's northern border; 4 a portion lies within the City's Sphere of
Influence. Most of the area consists of undeveloped hillsides, although large-lot
residential subdivisions have been established in the areas designated Hillside
Residential (0.1 to 2.0 du/ac) and Open Space (0.0 to 0.10 du/ac). The area also has
significant land set aside for resource conservation in Day and East Etiwanda
Canyons, where no development is allowed.
Hillside development in Rancho Cucamonga is regulated by the Hillside Development
Ordinance, which applies to all projects on land with natural slopes of eight percent
grade or greater, with some exceptions, as indicated in the Ordinance. The Hillside
Overlay District, as depicted on the Development District Map in the Development
Code, defines the boundaries. The Hillside Overlay District also applies to areas
outside of this focus area.
The Ordinance includes a comprehensive set of guidelines and standards that seek
to allow for reasonable development of hillside areas while minimizing the adverse
effects of grading, protecting environmentally sensitive areas, and providing for public
health and safety. The Ordinance contains basic design guidelines and minimum
development standards. The intent is to encourage innovative and alternative
development solutions, as well as to establish minimum acceptable criteria.
Clustering of units is encouraged where feasible, and positioning the units to "fit" the
land and minimize grading is required.
The most significant provisions of the Ordinance involve the use of:
■ Slope development standards, which require development integration with
the slope and increasingly restrictive grading and structural design as the
slope increases
■ A slope density formula, which limits the maximum possible density allowed
based upon the slope gradient
■ Building envelopes, which limit the maximum allowable building height to 30
feet, as measured from the finished grade. Different standards apply in the
Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood &Conservation Plan Area
Table LU-8: Slope Development Guidelines establishes the design, grading, and
development criteria associated with various slope conditions. These guidelines are
further defined in the Hillside Development Ordinance.
Managing Land Use, Community Design,and Historic Resources
LU-44 RAN C H O CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN
These Specific Plans are no longer stand-alone documents. A summary of each is
provided below.
Table LU-9: Adopted Specific Plans and Planned Communities
Name Acreage Date Adopted
Specific Plans
Etiwanda North.Specific Plan 61850 1992
M q
Etiwanda Specific Play111 PRIM
3,000 1983
Foothill Boulevard Specific PIan4 , 560 1987
Industrial Area Specific Plan 59000 1981
Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan (Empire Lakes) 380 1994
4,393 2019
Planned Communities
Caryn Planned Community Development Plan 244 1986
Terra Vista Community Plan 1,321 1983
Victoria Community Plan 2,150 1981
Etiwanda North Specific Plan
The same development pressure that prompted the 1983 Etiwanda Specific Plan also
necessitated the need for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, adopted in 1992. The
plan area is located just north of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. A portion of the Specific
Plan area lies outside the City and outside the Sphere of Influence. Open space is
the most prominent feature of the Etiwanda North area, which is comprised of a
gently sloping alluvial fan and chaparral habitat situated on the lower slopes of the
foothills. Drainage courses throughout the Etiwanda North area support a variety of
tree species, including oak, sycamore, and walnut, among others. A unique feature of
the area is a freshwater marsh, approximately 11 acres in size, located in the
northwestern portion of the area. Open space is expected to remain a prominent
feature even after development occurs. The Specific Plan builds upon the unique
character and charm of the Etiwanda Specific Plan area by providing a land use
pattern that extends the low-density character of Old Etiwanda into the Etiwanda
North area.
Etiwanda Specific Plan
Etiwanda can be described as a rural community, characterized by large land
parcels, eucalyptus tree rows, remnants of citrus groves and vineyards, stone curbs,
and other elements that convey its unique and historic sense of place. The Specific
Plan area is located within the northeast corner of the City and is roughly bounded by
the 1-15 to the southeast, the City's Sphere of Influence to the north, the Victoria
Planned Community to the west and the City's industrial area to the south. The
Specific Plan project area encompasses over 3,000 acres. The main purpose of the
Specific Plan is to ensure the continued rural character of this portion of the City.
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan
The Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan provides a balanced and unified pattern of
development along Foothill Boulevard by taking advantage of opportunities in future
community growth. The plan calls for a series of activity centers and gateways, linked
through a unifying suburban parkway design.
Managing Land Use, Community Design,and Historic Resources
LU-48 RAN C H O CUCAMONGA G E N E RAL PLAN
An additional purpose is to capture and reflect the historic significance of this route as
part of the legendary Route 66 that linked Los Angeles and Chicago for several
critical decades during the twentieth century. Such landmarks as the Sycamore Inn
and the Magic Lamp Restaurant symbolize that memorable period in the emergence
of Southern California as a mecca for families seeking a better life. The combination
of use patterns, development standards, and design guidelines of the plan testify to
the area's complex planning issues and the need for creative regulatory devices.
Ultimately, the goal of the Specific Plan is to give this critical centerpiece of the City
the prominence it deserves.
Industrial Area Specific Plan
The Industrial Area Specific Plan is a particularly significant specific plan due to its
successful role in the development of the City's industrial base (which is a critical
component of an overall long-term balance of uses). Part of this success can be
attributed to the quality standards incorporated into the Specific Plan and the
protection those standards afford to business investors in this area. The Specific
Plan, encompassing nearly 5,000 acres, has been divided into three zones and 19
subareas. The subareas represent specific land use characteristics and development
constraints which can be dealt with on a subarea basis rather than through the
application of broadly applied development standards. The purpose of the Specific
Plan is to establish specific standards and guidelines that will be used for
development throughout the City's industrial area.
Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub-Area 18 Plan (Empire Lakes)
The purpose of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan is to provide for a broader mix of land
uses than was originally permitted within the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The plan
was expanded to include such uses as recreational, hotel/conference center, retail,
restaurant, and entertainment, as well as office, research and development, and light
industrial uses. A subsequent amendment to further expand the use list included
multi-unit residential development to maximize potential use of the Metrolink Station
near Milliken Avenue.
Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood &Conservation Plan
The Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood & Conservation Plan represents a unique
opportunity to permanently preserve unspoiled views of the San Gabriel foothills and
mountain, permanently conserve rural open space and habitat resources, secure
recreational access to the foothills, while providing unique new neighborhoods that
reflect Rancho Cucamonga's heritage. This Plan has been prepared to guide land
use and shape new development within the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood &
Conservation Plan Area. The community-based vision is for large quantities of
conserved rural and natural open space in the northern portion of the Plan Area,
underwritten by and in balance with high quality neighborhoods development in the
southerly areas already surrounded by existing neighborhoods. This area had long
been under San Bernardino County's jurisdiction, and the County must manage
millions of acres of rural land. The City has the interest and the focus to prepare and
implement a very special plan for the future of this portion of rural land, taking control
of it for future generations.
Adopted Planned Communities
Caryn Planned Community Development Plan
The Caryn Planned Community Development Plan, now completed, lies north of the
Victoria planned community. The community's special identity is provided by an
elementary school, single-unit residential development, and walking trails that tie the
community together.
Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources
LU-52 RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN
i
LLQ- o: G _eral Special Boulevards
ail
5 we
tr Street Segment Implementatio
Name _..
Haven North City boundary to Pacific Haven Avenue Beautification Master Pian
Avenue Electric Trail
Pacific Electric Trail to Foothill Terra Vista Planned Community and Haven
Avenue Beautification Master Plan
Foothill to 4th Street Industrial Area Specific Plan and Haven
Avenue Beautification Master Plan
Milliken Hi"c'de+^ °ttl-c+�Wilson Caryn Planned Community and Etiwanda
Avenue Avenue to Kenyon Way Heights Neighborhood&Conservation Plan
W Kenyon Way to Base Line Victoria Planned Community and Milliken
Road Avenue Beautification Master Plan
Base Line Road to Foothill Terra Vista Planned Community and Milliken
Boulevard Avenue Beautification Master Plan
th Industrial Area Specific Plan and Milliken
Foothill Boulevard to 4 Street Avenue Beautification Master Plan
Day Creek SR-21 o Freeway to Foothill Day Creek Boulevard Scenic/Recreation
Boulevard Boulevard Corridor Master Plan
Base Line Haven Avenue to Rochester Terra Vista Planned Community and Base
Road Avenue Line Road Beautification Master Plan
Rochester Avenue to Day Creek Day Creek Boulevard Scenic/Recreation
Boulevard Corridor Master Plan Community and Base
Line Road Beautification Master Plan
Day Creek Boulevard to Victoria Planned Community
Etiwanda Avenue
Etiwanda Avenue to East Avenue Etiwanda Specific Plan Community and Base
Line Road Beautification Master Plan
West of Haven Avenue Base Line Road Beautification Master Plan
Foothill Grove Avenue to Eastern
Boulevard boundary of Subarea 3 of Foothill Foothill Specific Plan
Specific Plan; and 1-15 to East
Avenue
Western boundary of Industrial
Area Specific Plan to Day Creek Industrial Area Specific Plan
Boulevard
Day Creek Boulevard to 1-15 Victoria Specific Plan
Freeway
Arrow Industrial Area Specific Plan and adjacent
Highway Grove Avenue to East Avenue development for segment between Archibald
Avenue and Haven Avenue
Church Haven Avenue to Day Creek
Street Boulevard
Day Creek Boulevard to eastern Victoria Planned Community
boundary of Victoria Planned
Community
6th Street West of Haven Avenue to Industrial Area Specific Plan and 6th Street
Hellman Avenue Beautification Master Plan
4th Street West of Archibald Avenue to City 4th Street Beautification Master Plan
boundary
Managing Land Use, Community Design,and Historic Resources
R A N C H 0 CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN LU-79
Table LU-10: General Plan Special Boulevards
sheet,ir
Name eet Segme ntAfo--n'-
------ 1�------
Archibald Northern boundary of City to Archibald Avenue Beautification Master Plan
Avenue Arrow Highway
Arrow vvay Route to 4"' Industrial Area Specific Plan and Archibald
Street Avenue Beautification Master Plan
Rochester Base Line Road to Foothill Terra Vista Planned Community
Avenue Boulevard
Foothill Boulevard to southern Industrial Area Specific Plan
City limits Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood &
Banyan Street to Wilson Avenue Conservation Plan
Miller Eastern boundary of Victoria
Avenue Planned Community to East Etiwanda Specific Plan
Avenue
Etiwanda Wilson Avenue to Arrow Highway Etiwanda and Foothill Specific Plans
Avenue
East Avenue Wilson Avenue to Foothill Etiwanda Specific Plan
Boulevard
Wilson Haven Avenue to Milken Adjacent Development and Etiwanda Heights
Avenue Avenue Day Creek Boulevard Neighborhood&Conservation Plan
Victoria Park Milliken Avenue to Base Line Victoria Planned Community
Lane Road
Beautification Master Plans
During the late 1980s and into the early `90s, Rancho Cucamonga prepared
Beautification Master Plans for many of the Special Boulevards. These plans sought
to provide consistent direction to development and establish attractive design themes
that would reinforce the City's high design standards.
In general, the Beautification Master Plans go beyond the typical parkway street tree
concept and integrate street enhancement plans into a broader landscape fabric
within the entire parkway setback area. Most of the concepts incorporate background
or accent trees, rockscape, and even perimeter walls. Design objectives of the
Beautification Master Plans are to:
■ Provide identifiable themes along major streets
■ Provide attractive, enduring, and maintainable streetscapes
■ Complement other community improvements
■ Protect the public's health, safety, and welfare
These plans are being successfully implemented throughout the City. Table LU-12
lists the Beautification Master Plans and the design focus of each concept.
Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources
LU-84 R A N C H 0 CUCAMONGA G EN ERAL P L A N
Table CM-1: Classifications of General Plan Roadways
East/West Street Boundaries North/South Street Boundaries
West Boundaries
North South
Collector Streets
Day Creek Boulevard Y Day Creek Boulevard Etiwanda Avenue Sapphire Ave tie. Almond Street 19th Street
East Avenue Etiwanda Avenue Wilson Avenue Baker Avenue Foothill Boulevard 8th Street
Hillside RoadWestern City Boundary Haven Avenue Carnelian Avenue Almond Avenue Banyan Street
Banyan Street Western City Boundary Youngs Canyon Road Beryl Street Reales Street Base Line Road
Church Avenue Hermosa Avenue Archibald Avenue Hellman Avenue Hillside Road Foothill Boulevard
9th Street Grove Avenue Archibald Avenue Amethyst Avenue Almond Street Base Line Road
8th Street Grove Avenue Haven Avenue Archibald Avenue City Boundary Hillside Road
7th Street Hellman Avenue Archibald Avenue Hermosa Avenue City Boundary Banyan Avenue
Victoria Street East Avenue 1-15 Freeway Santa Anita Avenue 6th Street 4th Street
Highland Avenue Kenyan Way East Avenue Wardman Bullock Road City Boundary Wilson Avenue
Jersey Boulevard Haven Avenue Rochester Avenue Terra Vista Parkway Church Avenue Town Center Drive
Vintage Drive Day Creek Boulevard Etiwanda Avenue
Town Center Drive I Haven Avenue Spruce Avenue
W. Elm Avenue T� Town Center Church Avenue
Mountain View Drives Spruce Avenue Terra Vista Parkway
Modified Collector with Median
Victoria Park Lane Fairmont Way Base Line Road
Secondary Streets
Wilson Avenue Carnelian Avenue Day Creek Boulevard Carnelian Street Banyan Street Vineyard Avenue
19th Street West City Boundary San Benito Avenue Vineyard AvenueCarnelian Street 8th Street
Church Avenue Archibald Avenue Haven Avenue Hellman Avenue _. Foothill Boulevard 4th Street
Church Avenue Rochester Avenue Victoria Park Archibald Avenue Hillside Road Wilson Avenue
Miller Avenue Etiwanda Avenue East Avenue Hermosa Avenue Banyan Street 4th Street
6th Street T Hellman Avenue Haven Avenue Haven Avenue City Boundary Wilson Avenue
6th Street 1-15 Freeway Etiwanda Avenue Buffalo Avenue; 6th Street 4th Street
Civic Center Drive Haven Avenue White Oak Avenue Etiwanda Avenue Base Line Road Foothill Boulevard
Poplar Street Church Avenue Rochester Avenue East Avenue Wilson Avenue Foothill Boulevard
Spruce Avenue T „} Base Line Road Red Oak/White Oak
Etiwanda Avenue, City Boundary Wilson Avenue
Red Oak Street Arrow Highway Spruce Avenue
White Oak Avenue Arrow Highway Spruce Avenue
Mayten Avenue Church Avenue Foothill Boulevard
E. Elm Avenue Church Avenue White Oak Avenue
Victoria Park Lane Base Line Road Day Creek Boulevard
Community Mobility
RANCHO CUCAMONGA G E N E RAL PLAN
CM-11
Table CM-1: Classifications of General Plan RoadwaysBou P= w
East/West Stree st North/South Street North ut -
Modified Secondary with Median
Willson Avenue Wardman Bullock Cherry Avenue Wardman Bullock Road Wilson Avenue Cherry Avenue
Church Avenue Victoria Park Lane Etiwanda Avenue
Church Avenue Haven Avenue Rochester Avenue
Terra Vista Parkway Church Avenue Church Avenue
Major Arterials
Base Line Road - West City Boundary Haven Avenue Archibald Avenue Hillside Road 4th Street
Arrow Highway Grove Avenue East Avenue Rochester Avenue Highland Avenue 6th Street
4th Street Hellman Avenue Archibald Avenue Etiwanda Avenue Foothill Boulevard 4th Street
Modified Major with Median
Wilson Avenue �u , ,� ,,; Day Creek Boulevard Wardman Bullock Road Day Creek Boulevard Wilson Avenue SR-210 Freeway
Wilson Avenue JW Cherry Avenue 1-15 Freeway Cherry Avenue Wilson Avenue 1-15 Freeway
Church Avenue Day Creek Boulevard Victoria Park Lane Milliken Avenue Wilson Avenue Banyan Street
Major Divided Arterials
Base Line Road Haven Avenue Etiwanda Avenue Haven Avenue Wilson Avenue Trademark Parkway
Foothill Boulevard Grove Avenue Day Creek Channel Milliken Avenue Banyan Street 4th Street
Foothill Boulevard 1-15 Freeway East Avenue Day Creek Boulevard SR-210 Freeway Foothill Boulevard
6th Street Haven Avenue Rochester Avenue
4th Street Archibald Avenue Etiwanda Avenue
Major Divided Highways
Base Line Road Etiwanda Avenue East Avenue Milliken Avenue 1 5th Street 4th Street
Foothill Boulevard Day Creek Channel 1-15 Freeway Haven Avenue Trademark Parkway 4th Street
Note:
1. Refer to the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood&Conservation Plan for classifications of roadways within the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood& Conservation Plan Area.
Community Mobility
CM-12 RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN