164 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
INFRASTRUCTURE
CHAPTER 7
Figure 7.4-1 Storm Drain System Map
DRAFT NOVEMBER 2023 165
INFRASTRUCTURE
CHAPTER 7
Figure 7.4-2 Storm Drain System Map – Areas of Concern
166 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
INFRASTRUCTURE
CHAPTER 7
As the DTSP area continues to form, it is important to identify when areas of pervious surfaces are being replaced with concrete, asphalt, and other impervious surfaces as they will have a large effect on stormwater collection system. At the time development proposals are made to the City, hydrology and hydraulic studies will be required to determine if existing systems are sufficient for the proposed additional flows and/or to determine the appropriate sizing of any new storm drain system.
7.5 ELECTRICAL SERVICES
Electricity is provided to the Specific Plan area by Southern California Edison (SCE), a private utility company. SCE sets its own service standards, with oversight from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), and facility improvement strategies. Electricity is transmitted by a system comprised of both underground and above-ground/overhead/ aerial power lines that currently supply sufficient electrical service to the Specific Plan area. At the time development proposals are made to the City, the applicant will be responsible for submitting applications to SCE for electrical service. SCE would determine whether adequate capacity is available or whether system upgrades may be required.
7.6 NATURAL GAS
The Southern California Gas Company, a subsidiary of Sempra Utilities (The Gas Company), a private utility company, is the natural gas service provider for the Specific Plan area. Natural gas pipelines exist along major street rights-of-way within the area.
The analysis and decision on capacity to meet future demand under buildout of the Specific Plan will be conducted by the Gas Company in coordination with the City at the time development occurs and building plans are submitted.
7.7 TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND CABLE
Charter Communications and Frontier Communications provide local and long distance communications services in the Specific Plan area. Both companies also provide cable and high-speed internet services. Various wireless carriers provide service within the Specific Plan area. The analysis and decision on capacity to meet future demand under buildout of the Specific Plan will be conducted by the individual telecommunications and cable providers. It is likely that local system upgrades will be required to serve the future build out
SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
CHAPTER 8:
ADMINISTRATION
8.1 General ..............................................................................168
8.2 Land Divisions....................................................................169
8.3 Entitlement Processes Established in the
San Dimas Municipal Code................................................169
8.4 Entitlement Processes Established in this
Specific Plan.......................................................................169
8.5 Non-Conforming Uses and Structures ..............................172
168 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 8
8.1 GENERAL
The coordinated and systematic administration of the San Dimas Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) is essential to accomplish the vision for the area’s future. This Administration Section sets forth the administrative processes to review proposed land uses and development.
The San Dimas DTSP serves as the implementation tool for the General Plan and establishes the zoning regulations for the Specific Plan area. All development proposals within the Specific Plan area are subject to the procedures established herein. The standard and other requirements of this Development Code shall be administered and enforced by the Community Development Department, the Planning Commission, and City Council in the same manner as the provisions of the City’s Zoning Code.
8.1.1 AUTHORITY
This Specific Plan was prepared pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code, Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 3, Article 8 (Sections 65450 through 65457), which allows the preparation of specific plans as required for implementation of the general plan.
The Downtown Specific Plan is the regulatory document guiding land use and development within the boundaries identified in this specific plan. Upon adoption, this Specific Plan will serve as zoning for the properties involved. It establishes the necessary plans, development standards, regulations, infrastructure requirements, design guidelines, and implementation programs on which subsequent project-related development activities are to be based. It is intended that local public works projects, design review plans, detailed site plans, grading and building permits, or any other action requiring ministerial or discretionary approval applicable to this area be consistent with this Specific Plan.
8.1.2 INTERPRETATION
In the event of ambiguity or circumstances not specifically provided in this DTSP, the Director of Community Development shall interpret the intent of the land use standards. The Director may, at his or her discretion, refer interpretations to the Planning Commission for consideration and action.
Such a referral shall be accompanied by a written analysis of issues related to the interpretation. All interpretations made by the Director may be appealed to the Planning Commission in accordance with the SDMC.
8.1.3 CONFLICT
Where any provision of this Plan and the Municipal Code appear to be in conflict, the provisions of this Plan shall prevail. For matters on which this Plan is silent, the provisions of the Municipal Code shall apply.
8.1.4 SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phase, or portion of this Specific Plan, or any future amendments or additions, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court or competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the DTSP, or any future amendments or additions.
DRAFT NOVEMBER 2023 169
ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 8
8.2 LAND DIVISIONS
Applications for, as well as processing and approval of proposed divisions of land, including, but not limited to, parcel mergers, lot line adjustments, parcel maps, and tract maps within the Specific Plan Area shall comply with the policies, development standards, and design guidelines contained within this Specific Plan, provisions of the California Subdivision Map Act, the subdivision ordinance of the City of San Dimas (Title 17), and the applicable procedural requirements of the San Dimas Municipal Code.
8.3 ENTITLEMENT PROCESSES ESTABLISHED
IN THE SAN DIMAS MUNICIPAL CODE
The San Dimas Municipal Code establishes specific standards, processes, and procedures for a number of entitlement reviews that apply within the specific plan area, including but not limited to Development Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Tree Removals, Temporary Uses, Zone Changes and Amendments, and Appeals Procedures. All standards of the SDMC apply unless otherwise amended or replaced by this specific plan.
8.4 ENTITLEMENT PROCESSES ESTABLISHED
IN THIS SPECIFIC PLAN
For purposes of streamlining land use and development proposals while also providing standards to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, this Specific Plan provides additional mechanisms to allow the Director of Community Development to approve Minor Conditional Use Permits and to make Similar Use Determinations as outlined below. These processes are applicable only to the specific plan area.
• Section 8.4.1 for Minor Conditional Use Permits
• Section 8.4.2 for Similar Use Determinations. This process replaces and supersedes SDMC 18.192, Classification of Use, for the specific plan area.
8.4.1 MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
A Minor Conditional Use Permit is required for land uses which, though may be appropriate in the applicable zoning district, could have unique effects or impacts on the area in which they are located unless mitigated through special review and conditions but which do not rise to the level of requiring a Conditional Use Permit.
A. Applicability. Uses designated as “MCUP” in the Land Use Table contained within Chapter 3, Section 4, Table 3.4-2 may be permitted or conditionally permitted subject to the provisions of this chapter.
B. In lieu of a notice of administrative decision, a notice of pending approval shall be mailed to all property owners within a five hundred (500) foot radius of the subject site.
1. Such notice shall indicate that the permit shall be approved, conditionally approved or denied on a specified date and request that any party concerned about the final determination of said permit provide a written statement explaining their concerns.
170 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 8
i. This statement shall be based only on issues of significance related directly to the application.
ii. If the Director finds that the statement has merit and the issue(s) can be adequately addressed through additional Conditions of Approval, the Director may approve the permit with the added conditions, as long as the concerned party is notified of the decision.
iii. If the Director finds that the statement is without merit, the Director may approve the permit as is, as long as the concerned party is notified of the decision.
iv. If a party wishes to contest the approval of the permit, an appeal must be filed after the permit is approved, pursuant to Section E below
C. Findings.
1. The proposed use is consistent with both the General Plan and zoning code of the subject property;
2. The establishment, maintenance or conducting of the proposed use will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood;
3. Any potential effects which may have an adverse effect on surrounding properties and/or neighborhoods can be minimized to the extent practical and any remaining adverse effects are justified by the benefits conferred upon the community as a whole.
D. Appeals. The issuance of a Minor Conditional Use Permit may be appealed, subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.212.
E. Expansion of Use(s). No expansion of the use(s) or service(s) granted by the issuance of a Minor Conditional Use Permit shall be allowed without the filing and approval of a Modification of an Approved Permit, which will be subject to review by the same review authority who originally approved or granted the permit.
F. Abandonment of Use. Any use approved by a Minor Conditional Use Permit which has ceased for a period in excess of twelve months, shall be considered abandoned and the use may not recommence without filing for a new Minor Conditional Use Permit.
8.4.2 SIMILAR USE DETERMINATIONS
The land use table does not include all possible uses. When a specific use is not listed and it is unclear whether the use is permitted, permitted with a conditional or Minor Conditional Use Permit, or not permitted, the similar use determination allows the Director of Community Development to determine whether or not a proposed use is similar to a listed use and whether it may be permitted or permitted with a conditional or Minor Conditional Use Permit in a particular zone.
A. Applicability. A similar use determination is required when a use is not specifically listed in this specific plan but may be permitted if it is determined to be similar in nature to a use that is permitted or permitted with a Conditional or Minor Conditional Use Permit.
B. Initiation. A similar use determination can be initiated by staff or can be initiated by the public using an application maintained by the City of San Dimas Planning Division. The fee shall be as established by City Council resolution.
C. Director Authority and Right to Forward to Planning Commission.
The Director of Community Development may prepare a similar use determination. The issuance of a similar use determination is an administrative function of the Director, and no public hearing or notice is required. The Director of Community Development may, at his or her sole discretion, require that the similar use determination be referred to the Planning Commission for review and decision.
D. Findings Required. The Director of Community Development shall make a similar use determination after finding all of the following. If
DRAFT NOVEMBER 2023 171
ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 8
the Director does not make all of these findings, he/she shall not make the similar use determination:
1. That the subject use and its operation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan;
2. That the subject use and its operation is consistent with the purposes and intent of the zone in which the use is proposed to be located;
3. That the subject use is similar to one or more uses permitted in the zone within which it is proposed to be located. A use shall be deemed to be similar only where the size, scale, design and impact of the uses are comparable. A use shall not be deemed to be similar when the operation of the use involves greater impacts in terms of traffic, parking, noise, glare, odor, refuse or other environmental considerations; generates greater demand for public services; does not have comparable hours of operation; is significantly more intensive in the number of employees, patrons and other users of the facility; and is not complementary to other uses in the zone.
E. Determinations. Determinations shall be made in writing and shall contain the facts that support the determination. The department shall maintain all such determinations on record for review by the general public upon request. The notice of decision shall be provided, in writing, to the applicant and any interested parties who request a copy.
The notice shall include:
1. A brief statement explaining the criteria and standards considered relevant to the decision.
2. A statement of the standards and facts relied upon in rendering the decision.
3. An explanation of appeal rights and appeal deadlines.
F. Appeals. An action on a Similar Use Determination shall become effective 14 days after a decision has been rendered unless an appeal is filed in accordance with the Appeal Procedures established in the SDMC.
8.4.3 STREAMLINED REVIEW OF MULTI-UNIT AND
MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS
For a multi-unit residential development or mixed-use residential development to be eligible for a streamlined ministerial approval process, the development must meet the specific eligibility criteria set forth in Government Code section 65913.4.
All eligible multi-unit ministerial projects must comply with the objective design standards located in Chapter 5. Objective design standards are those that involve no personal or subjective judgment by the plan reviewer and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark. Projects requesting exceptions and/or administrative modifications to these standards will be reviewed under the discretionary review process described in the City’s Zoning Code.
172 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 8
3. Routine maintenance and repairs that do not constitute an alteration or addition may be performed on a structure or site when the use is nonconforming, and on a nonconforming structure.
C. Alterations and Additions to Nonconforming Uses and Structures
1. A nonconforming structure, which is nonconforming by reason of its use, shall not be moved, altered, or enlarged unless required by law, or the moving, alternation or enlargement will result in the elimination of the nonconformity, except as otherwise provide in this section.
2. A nonconforming use shall not be enlarged, intensified, or extended in such a way as to occupy any part of the structure or site or enlarged or another structure or site which it did not occupy at the time it became a nonconforming use or in such a way as to displace any conforming use occupying a structure or site, except as otherwise provide in this section.
3. A nonconforming structure shall not be altered or reconstructed so as to increase the discrepancy between existing conditions and the development standards for front yards, side yards, rear yards, height of structures, or usable open space prescribed in the development standards for the zone in which the structure is located. A nonconforming structure shall not be moved or enlarged unless the new location or enlargement shall conform to the development standards, or usable open space prescribed in the in the development standards for the area designation in which the structure is located.
4. A use which fails to meet the development standards of the area designation in which it is located shall not be enlarged or extended, or shall not have equipment replaced that results in failure to meet development standards sunless the enlargement, extension or replacement will result in elimination of nonconformity with development standards for that area.
8.5 NONCONFORMING USES
AND STRUCTURES
Any existing use or building that becomes nonconforming as a result of the DTSP shall comply with all rules and regulations set forth below.
A. Definitions
1. Nonconforming property means any subdivision of land that was lawfully established and in compliance with all applicable ordinances and laws at the time the property was subdivided.
2. Nonconforming building means any structure, building or improvement upon land, other than land itself including sign that was lawfully established and in compliance with all applicable ordinances and laws at the time the structure, building or improvement was established.
3. Nonconforming use means any use of land that was lawfully established and in compliance with all applicable ordinances and laws at the time the use was established.
4. An existing use shall be deemed a “legal nonconforming use” if prior to its establishment the required permits were obtained, prior to the adoption of the DTSP (i.e., a building permit, conditional use permit, etc.).
B. Continuation and Maintenance
1. A use lawfully occupying a structure or a site, that does not conform with the use regulations or the development standards for the zone in which the use is located shall be deemed to be a nonconforming use and may be continued, except as otherwise provided in this section.
2. A structure, lawfully occupying a site, that does not conform with the development standards for front yards, rear yards, height, coverage, or distances between structures, for the zone in which the structure is located, shall be deemed to be a non-conforming use and may be continued, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. Page 184 – 245 DRAFT NOVEMBER 2023 173
ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 8
3. Restoration of a nonconforming use or structure shall require the review and approval of the Director of Community Development, although may choose to direct to the Planning Commission for final approval.
F. Exceptions to Provisions of Nonconforming Uses and Structures Expansion of legal nonconforming uses and structures such as an increase in floor area or the site area or an intensification of use may be permitted subject to a Conditional Use Permit. In addition, the required CUP findings, the Planning Commission must also make the following findings:
1. The expansion of the nonconforming structure and/or site comply with the Design Guidelines and Standards, the Mobility infrastructure of the Specific Plan; and
2. The expansion of the nonconforming use does not increase the discrepancy between existing conditions and the standards for front yard, side yards, rear yard, height of structures, distances between structures, and parking facilities as prescribed in the regulations for the zone in which the structure is located.
D. Discontinuation of Nonconforming Use
Whenever a nonconforming use has been discontinued, or changed to a conforming use for a continuous period of 180 days or more, the nonconforming use shall not be reestablished, and the structure or site thereafter shall be in conformity with the development standards for the zone in which it is located. Discontinuance of a use shall include cessation of the existing nonconforming use, regardless of intent to resume said nonconforming use.
E. Restoration of Damaged Structure
1. Whenever a structure which does not comply with the standards for front, side, and rear yards; height of structures; distances between structures; and parking facilities as prescribed in the regulations for the zoning designation in which the structure is located, or for the use which does not conform with the regulations for the area in which it is located, is destroyed by fire or other calamity, by act of God, or by the public enemy to the extent of 50 percent or less, the structure may be restored and the nonconforming use may be resumed, provided that restoration is started within one year and diligently pursued to completion. When the destruction exceeds 50 percent, or the structure is voluntarily demolished or is required by law to be demolished, the structure shall not be restored except in full conformity with the regulations for the zoning designation in which it is located, and the nonconforming use shall not be resumed.
2. The extent of damage or partial destruction shall be based upon the ratio of the estimated cost of restoring the structure to its condition prior to such damage or partial destruction to the estimated cost of duplicating the entire structure, as it existed prior thereto. Estimates for this purpose shall be made by or shall be reviewed and approved by the building official and shall be based on the minimum cost of construction in compliance with the building code.
174 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9:
SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
CHAPTER 9:
IMPLEMENTATION
9.1 Introduction.......................................................................175
9.2 Area-Specific Fees, Dedications, and Exactions................176
9.3 Special Districts .................................................................177
9.4 Federal and State Grants ..................................................178
9.5 Implementation and Phasing ...........................................181
DRAFT NOVEMBER 2023 175
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9:
9.1 INTRODUCTION
It is expected that a range of funding tools will be utilized to finance development in Downtown San Dimas, associated infrastructure improvements, and ongoing operations.
The responsibility for implementing these tools will fall to the City, other governmental agencies, private entities, and authorized private associations, such as homeowners or business associations.
The funding sources identified in this Chapter are examples. A more comprehensive list may be developed over time as new sources come into being or sources listed here are no longer available. The ultimate mix of financing mechanisms will be determined in the implementation process based on final technical analyses of costs, benefits, and burdens, and on deliberations involving City staff, sponsoring entities, property owners, developers, elected officials, bond counsel, underwriters, finance experts, and others.
Regardless of the financing mechanisms selected, any approach should seek to align the sources, timing, and scope of financing to the specified uses, as described by the following principles:
• There should be assurances that necessary funding will be available at the time specific infrastructure items are required.
• Financial burdens on development should be kept within industry standards and market constraints.
• The plan should be responsive to expected variations in timing, location, and type of development.
The financing tools and their applicability fall into three distinct categories discussed on the next page.
176 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9:
9.2 AREA-SPECIFIC FEES, DEDICATIONS,
AND EXACTIONS
9.2.1 AREA DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
Development impact fees are a potential funding source for affordable housing, parks, and recreational open space. These fees, paid by new residential and commercial development projects, must only be used to pay for improvements that can be demonstrated to serve new residents and businesses (from new development), but these fees can be combined with other funding sources to fund a project that serves both new and existing residents or businesses. A nexus study—which calculates the new increment of development, estimates the portion of an improvement project attributable to that increment of growth, and allocates the fee among the new development projects by land use—is required by state law for implementation. Additional impact fees, such as a transportation and traffic impact fee, could be considered as a means to fund additional improvements that enhance mobility.
9.2.2 REVENUE BONDS
Public activities that are revenue generating and create sufficient cash flow to cover operating costs and debt service can potentially issue taxfree municipal debt to cover the cost of capital improvements. A common example of this is revenue bonds for parking garage construction where there is pay parking.
9.2.3 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND OTHER
PUBLIC DEBT
New commercial and lodging projects could generate significant new sales tax and transit occupancy (lodging) tax revenues that will flow into the City’s General Fund. This new money could be used to finance debt service on tax-exempt debt obligations so that existing activities provided through the General Fund are not impacted. Such a General Obligation bond, however, requires a two-thirds vote of local residents (except for educational facilities) to approve. Alternatively, for facilities that can serve as collateral for debt, certificates of participation are a public finance technique that do not require voter approval.
9.2.4 DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS
Under the Subdivision Map Act, developers may be required to dedicate land or make cash payments for public facilities required or affected by their project (e.g., road right-of-way fronting individual properties).
Dedications are typically made for road and utility rights-of-way, park sites, and land for other public facilities. Cash contributions may be made for other public facilities that are directly required by their projects (e.g., payments for a traffic signal).
DRAFT NOVEMBER 2023 177
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9:
9.3 SPECIAL DISTRICTS
9.3.1 INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING DISTRICTS AND
ENHANCED INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING
DISTRICTS
Qualified entities can create an Infrastructure Financing District (IFD), per the 1990 Infrastructure Financing Act, to pay for the construction of capital facilities that have “communitywide significance and provide significant benefits to an area larger than the area of the district.” Such facilities may include transit, highways, water systems, sewer projects, parking structures, flood control, childcare facilities, libraries, parks, and solid waste facilities. Broader authority of Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFD) is provided in Government Code Section 53398.50 et seq.
An IFD or EIFD provides funding by diverting a portion of property tax increment revenue for 30 years to secure the issuance of bonds to finance qualifying projects. The IFD increment is defined as total annual property tax revenue within the district, less a base year amount, less the portion allocated to schools, less the portion claimed by agencies that did not voluntarily approve the IFD formation. As such, IFD tax increment is less than that once generated as redevelopment tax increment, possibly significantly less depending on the specific conditions of each IFD approval.
In the past, the difficulty in implementing an IFD has limited its use in California. However, in 2014 and 2016, legislation was adopted that updates the 1990 Infrastructure Finance District (IFD) law, approved in 1990, by expanding the types of projects that can be funded with EIFDs and lowering voter approval requirements, making this type of financing a much more viable option. Voter approval is not required to form an EIFD, however there is a 55 percent requirement to authorize bonds. Where an IFD makes the tax increment available for up to 30 years, the EIFD extends that timeline to 45 years.
9.3.2 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
California law provides procedures to levy assessments against benefiting properties and issue tax-exempt bonds to finance public facilities and infrastructure improvements. Assessment districts, also known as improvement districts, are subject to majority vote of property owners.
Votes are weighted according to the amount of the proposed assessment on the parcel to which the ballot pertains. Assessments are distributed in proportion to the benefits received by each property as determined by engineering analysis and form a lien against property. Special assessments are fixed dollar amounts and may be prepaid, although they are typically paid back with interest over time by the assessed property owner.
Only public infrastructure improvements with property-specific benefits (e.g., roads, drainage, and sewer and water improvements) may be financed with assessments. In addition, standard public finance underwriting criteria require that the ratio of improved land value to assessment lien be equal to or greater than three to one.
178 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9:
9.3.2 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
A Business Improvement District (BID) is a common type of Special Assessment District that assesses business and/or property owners to fund maintenance, marketing, and other activities, including additional public services or improvements. If such a district were to be formed in the Specific Plan area, funding could be applied toward enhanced sanitation and cleaning as well as other streetscape and pedestrian improvements.
The City would need to reach out to property owners to educate them on the benefits and obtain majority support before moving forward with formation. If support can be obtained, a BID is a powerful tool for raising funds to provide enhancements to the area, but cannot be used to issue bonds.
9.3.3 LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT
Like a BID, a Landscape and Lighting Assessment District (LLAD) is another type of Special Assessment District that could be applied in Downtown to fund new street and pedestrian lights, landscaping, parkways, medians, and other amenities, and require benefits to accrue proportionately to the assessed properties. LLADs are more flexible than BIDs in that they can issue bonds and require a simple majority of property owners for formation.
There have been no LLADs established by the City of San Dimas for amenities like pedestrian lighting; forming such a district in the Specific Plan area would require creating a new Special Assessment District dedicated to that purpose. Given the same barrier to entry as a BID, formation of an LLAD that can issue bonds for the commercial areas that are supported by and include the LASC is a better approach for raising local funds than the formation of a BID.
9.4 FEDERAL AND STATE GRANTS
The City has received federal and state funding from other levels of government, including regional agencies (e.g., Metro and the Southern California Association of Governments), and the State and Federal governments. Funds from these sources, a selection of which is shown in the following table, may be made available for development in the Specific Plan Area. The availability, amount, and timing of these funds will need to be further evaluated.
DRAFT NOVEMBER 2023 179
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9:
Table 9.4-1 Federal and State Funding Sources
Program Description of Spaces
California Transit Oriented
Development (TOD) Housing
Program
This program, funded by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, makes low-interest loans available as gap financing for rental housing developments that include affordable units, and as mortgage assistance for homeownership developments. Loans and grants are available to qualified public entities for infrastructure improvements supporting TOD residential uses or to enable connections between these developments and the transit station
Community Based Transportation
Planning
Caltrans administers a grant program for transportation planning projects to improve mobility and lead to the programming or implementation phase for a community or region. With approximately $9 million in funding distributed through six grant programs annually, the program may offer the City of San Dimas additional funding for planning. Each of these six grant programs may be applicable for the Plan Area: Community-Based Transportation Planning, Environmental Justice, Partnership Planning, Statewide or Urban Transit Planning Studies, Rural or Small Urban Transit Planning Studies, and Transit Planning Student Internships.
Office of Traffic Safety (OTS)
The California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) was created to award grant dollars to local and state government departments for development of traffic safety programs. The office is in the state Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, and it functions as a conduit for federal grant money, which it allocates to eight separate program areas, of which two, for Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety and Roadway Safety, may be directly applicable to the Plan Area. City agencies are eligible to apply.
Transportation Development Act
Article 3 Funds
The Transportation Development Act (TDA) includes two separate public transportation funds—Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and the State Transit Assistance fund—designated for development and support of public transportation needs. Funding is allocated to areas of each county based on population, taxable sales and transit performance.
TDA funds may be used for many potential expenses that the transit village may generate, including engineering expenses, right-of-way acquisition, construction, improvements to existing pedestrian infrastructure, ADA compliance, and support facilities, such as transit shelters, bicycle parking, and pedestrian amenities.
Better Utilizing Investments to
Leverage Development (BUILD)
Originally known as the TIGER Grant program and administered by the Federal Department of Transportation (DOT), this funding program began with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Nearly $7.1 billion in discretionary grant money has been dedicated to build and repair freight and passenger transportation networks.
180 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9:
Table 9.4-1 Federal and State Funding Sources (continued) Program Description of Spaces
Transportation Alternatives (TA)
Transportation Alternatives consolidates three separate programs under the prior version of the Federal Aid Highway Program: Transportation Enhancements (TE), Safe Routes to School (SR2S), and the Recreational Trails Program (RTP). Of these, TE and SR2S are particularly relevant to opportunities in the Plan Area. TE funds may be used for the planning, design, and construction of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure such as bikeways, sidewalks, signaling and signage, traffic management techniques, and improvements designed for ADA compliance. SR2S funds may be used for a range of engineering, traffic calming, and educational projects.
Surface Transportation Program
(STP)
The Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STP) allocates funds that can be used for a wide range of projects, including road and transit improvements that include bicycle and pedestrian elements. STP provides flexibility to fund improvements that are outside the Federal aid highway system, so many streets near the Plan Area may be eligible.
Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality Improvement (CMAQ)
Program
The CMAQ program is designed to provide funding to support surface transportation projects and other related efforts that contribute to air quality improvements and provide congestion relief. Eligible projects are intended to lower emissions of ozone, carbon monoxide, and/or particulate matter.
Transit-Oriented Development
Planning Pilot
This pilot program provides funding to advance planning efforts that support transit-oriented development (TOD) associated with new fixed-guideway and core capacity improvement projects. Eligible recipients include State and local government agencies engaged in comprehensive planning that seeks to enhance economic development and ridership by means of increasing multimodal connectivity and accessibility, enhancing access to transit hubs for pedestrian and bicycle traffic, and promoting and enabling mixed-use development.
AB 2766 Clean Air Funds
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) administers this program to fund air pollution reduction efforts. Funding is drawn from automobile registration surcharges. A 40 percent portion of annual disbursement is automatically allocated to South Coast District member cities in proportion to population. The remaining 60 percent is allocated through a competitive grant program for projects that improve air quality. Nearly all Plan Area initiatives may potentially be eligible for funding from AB 2766 grants.
Bicycle Transportation Account
(BTA)
Caltrans administers the Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA), an annual program providing State funds for city and county projects that improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters. Cities and counties are eligible to apply for BTA funds. Eligibility is based on pre-adoption of a Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) that complies with Streets and Highways Code Section 891.4 that has been pre-approved by the appropriate Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) or Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA). Eligible uses for the funding include bikeways and related facilities, planning, safety, and education. The BTA is a reimbursement program, which requires allocated funds to be matched by at minimum 10 percent of the total project cost. BTA funds may also be used to apply for and match Federal grants or loans. Approximately $7.2 million is appropriated annually for the program statewide.
DRAFT NOVEMBER 2023 181
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9:
Table 9.4-1 Federal and State Funding Sources (continued) Program Description of Spaces
SB 2 Planning Grants
Passed in 2017, the Building Homes and Jobs Act (SB 2) was signed into law as a mechanism for raising and administering funds the facilitate the development of affordable housing in California. Through a new $75 fee imposed and collected via real estate and mortgage document submittals, SB 2 is estimated to raise $250 million each year and administers funds to municipalities that meet specific conditions and project criteria. Planning grants are provided from the fund through a non-competitive application process and applies to planning efforts that lead to policy, zoning, environmental, and project review updates that facilitate the development of affordable housing.
These funds are not available to developers and can only be accessed by municipalities. The City received SB 2 grant funding for the completion of the City’s Housing Element and preparation of Objective Design Standards.
Cap and Trade: Affordable
Housing and Sustainable
Communities Program Grant
AHSC Program Grant directs funds to programs that constitute transit-oriented development (TOD), as residents housed in these developments are more likely to use public transit, thus relying less on a personal vehicle for commuting.
Monies from AHSC are accessible via an application and may be used for affordable housing development, housingrelated infrastructure, sustainable infrastructure, and sustainable program management. Developers as well as localities, RDA successor agencies, and other similar organizations are eligible to apply for AHSC Program Grant funds.
9.5 IMPLEMENTATION AND PHASING
Implementation of the Downtown Specific Plan will require action by several different departments and divisions within the City, including Community Development, Parks and Recreation Department, and Public Works. During the development process, much of the look and feel of the Downtown Specific Plan area will be determined by the architecture, landscaping, layout, and maintenance of individual developments, as prescribed by the design standards and guidelines articulated in Chapter 5. However, the City must take the lead in coordinating the needed area-wide actions that will enable complete implementation of the Specific Plan and its vision.
182 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9:
9.5.1 PHASING
The ultimate phasing of development and necessary improvements within the Downtown Specific Plan Area will be based on market factors as well as costs and available financing. Many of the infrastructure improvements will occur over time concurrently with new development. A recommended phasing strategy is outlined below, although actual phasing may change based on market conditions, particularly in view of economic and societal changes which may occur in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Near-Term Implementation
Within the first five years after adoption:
• Actively market development opportunities in the Downtown Specific Plan area as part of a coordinated effort in collaboration with the San Dimas Chamber of Commerce and other groups.
• Pursue a public-private partnership for the development of City-owned site to help demonstrate the market viability of higher-density multi-family housing downtown. • Complete roadway reconfigurations on Bonita Avenue and Arrow Highway to help spark redevelopment along these key corridors to promote a multi-modal approach in line with mobility policies.
• Implement shared parking agreements that allow larger high-density residential and mixed use projects to fulfill parking needs in part or in full by using underutilized spaces on other adjacent properties to optimize the number of spaces constructed and support development feasibility.
• Prioritize access and wayfinding improvements that strengthen the connection between the Gateway Village West and the Town Core districts. • Support expanded programming of events and public spaces to raise the profile of the Specific Plan area as an entertainment and cultural destination, partnering with business, arts, and cultural groups and organizations.
• Prepare a historic context statement and conduct a comprehensive historic resources survey of age-eligible properties in the Downtown Specific Plan area.
DRAFT NOVEMBER 2023 183
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9:
Intermediate/Longer-Term Implementation
Between 5-15 years after adoption:
• Facilitate redevelopment of key privately-owned opportunity sites shown on the Land Use Map that can accommodate significant housing development, including San Dimas Station South and North sites, the bowling alley site, and existing industrial properties south of the San Dimas Metro station.
• Coordinate construction of civic spaces with private development to ensure the provision of vibrant, inviting plazas and gathering spaces for residents, employees, and visitors to the Downtown Specific Plan area.
• Complete studies to plan for major transportation improvements needed to support full buildout of the DTSP.
• Synchronize the provision of infrastructure and streetscape improvements with new development, coordinating strategic planning, financial capacity, and physical development downtown through the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). • Monitor progress toward DTSP objectives and the effectiveness of development incentives, adjusting the directives of the DTSP as needed.
184 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
GLOSSARY
CHAPTER 10:
SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
CHAPTER 10:
GLOSSARY
10.1 Definitions.........................................................................185
DRAFT NOVEMBER 2023 185
GLOSSARY
CHAPTER 10:
10.1 DEFINITIONS
Arterial: A thorough major roadway or highway that provide the highest level of mobility and the highest speeds over the longest uninterrupted distance (i.e., interstate highways).
Articulation: The degree or manner in which a building wall or roofline is made up of distinct parts or elements. A highly articulated wall will appear to be composed of a number of different planes, usually made distinct by their change in direction (projections and recesses) and/or changes in materials, colors or textures.
Arcade: A series of arches supported on piers or columns. An arcade is typically covered.
Awning: A rigid or movable shelter supported entirely from the exterior wall of a building and of a type which may be retracted or folded against the face of the supporting building.
Bioretention: The process of collecting and filtering stormwater through landscape features.
Bio-swales: Landscape features that collect polluted stormwater runoff, soak it into the ground, and filter out pollution.
Canopy: A projection over a niche or doorway; often decorative or decorated.
Cantilevered Room: A room that sticks out past the building’s foundation or supporting wall below.
Collector: A thorough major or minor roadway that connects local roads and streets with arterials.
Colonnade: A row of columns supporting a roof, an entablature, or arcade Cornice: A continuous molded projection that crowns a wall or other construction or divides the wall horizontally for compositional purposes.
Dormer: A structure that projects out from a sloped roof, often a small room, bedroom, or part of an attic and includes a window.
Façade: The exterior face or faces of a building.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The numerical value obtained through dividing the gross floor area of the building or buildings located upon a lot or parcel of land by the total area of such lot or parcel of land.
Frontage: The wall of a building that faces a street, sidewalk, or parking lot.
Similar to a façade.
186 SAN DIMAS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
GLOSSARY
CHAPTER 10:
Hardscape: Any type of a decorative paving material such as interlocking pavers, stamped concrete, natural stone, tiles, etc. that are integrated within the landscape concept of a development proposal.
Height: The vertical distance from the grade to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the average height of the highest gable of a pitch or hip roof.
Intensity: The degree to which land is used. Intensity typically refers to the levels of concentration or activity of land uses.
Loggia: A roofed open gallery especially at an upper story overlooking an open court
Massing: The overall shape or arrangement of the bulk or volume of buildings and structures.
Modulation: The stepping back or projecting forward of sections of the façade of a structure as a means of breaking up the apparent bulk of continuous exterior walls.
Mullion: A vertical element that separates two panes of glass in a window.
Parapet: The part of an exterior wall that extends above the roof line; used to satisfy fire codes, hide roof equipment, increase the height of a building, or create an interesting silhouette.
Pitch: The slope of a roof commonly expressed in terms of inches of vertical rise per foot of horizontal run.
Scale: The size of a building and how it relates to a human or adjacent buildings and structures.
Setback: Distance from the front, side, or rear property line in which a structure is allowed to be built.
Stepback: The distance a building façade is recessed on a horizontal plane from the building façade immediately below it.
Streetscape: The general appearance of or character of a street that is influenced by the architecture, planning, and landscape of a street.
Transom: Acrosspiece separating a door from a window above it.
Trellis: A frame supporting open lattice work used as a screen or a support for growing vines or plants.
Unreinforced Masonry (URM) Code: It is an enforceable law that requires unreinforced masonry buildings to be demolished or brought up to earthquake and building codes by structural reinforcing.
Wayfinding: Encompasses all of the ways in which people orient themselves in physical space and navigate from place to place (i.e., signage).
Agenda Item Staff Report
To: Honorable Chair and Members of Planning Commission
For the Meeting of November 16, 2023
From: Luis Torrico, Interim Director of Community Development Prepared by: Anne Moore, Senior Planner
Subject: Draft Downtown Specific Plan Discussion
____________________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY
The preparation and adoption of a Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) will guide the City’s growth and all future development and redevelopment of the downtown area, including housing, in order to meet the needs and vision of the community. There has been a total of four (4) out of (5) community workshop meetings held since the DTSP process began a little over two years ago, in addition to an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Scoping Meeting held last November 2022. Additionally, a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) made up of community stakeholders was formed to serve as a voice for the community and four (4) meetings were held with the CAC to ensure that feedback and interests were heard and reflected throughout the process.
Since the last community workshop meeting was held on March 29, 2023, Staff and the consultant have continued to work diligently on the DTSP process. City staff provided an oral update on the DTSP process at the April 6, 2023 Planning Commission meeting as well as oral updates regarding the progress of the Draft DTSP document at the May 4, 2023 and October 19, 2023 Planning Commission meetings.
The EIR is still being prepared by the Consultant; however, a Draft of the Downtown Specific Plan is now available for review and discussion by the Planning Commission. Following input received by the Planning Commission, Staff will also present the Draft to the City Council for input before finalizing the document with the consultant, and holding a fifth community workshop meeting next year. The fifth community workshop meeting to be held early next year will give the public the ability to review the final draft prior to presenting the DTSP to the Planning Commission and City Council during public hearings for final adoption.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission provide Staff input on the Draft Downtown Specific Plan.
Attachment 2
Draft Downtown Specific Plan Discussion Page 2
For the Meeting of November 16, 2023
FISCAL IMPACT
Funds have already been appropriated to fund the development of the Downtown Specific Plan through three accounts 001.4308.020.019, 001.4308.020.024, and 001.4308.020.000 not to exceed the amount of $487,845. Additional funds are not being requested at this time.
BACKGROUND
Since the last community workshop meeting was held on March 29, 2023, Staff and the consultant have continued to work diligently on the DTSP process. City staff provided an oral update on the DTSP process at the April 6, 2023 Planning Commission meeting as well as oral updates regarding the progress of the Draft DTSP document at the May 4, 2023 and October 19, 2023 Planning Commission meetings. Through the course of four (4) community workshop meetings, four (4) meetings with the CAC, and numerous discussions with the project consultant team, a Draft of the Downtown Specific Plan has now been prepared and is ready for review and input from the Planning Commission and subsequently from the City Council. It’s important to note that this meeting, and the subsequent City Council meeting will not be public hearings, but simply an opportunity for the Commission and Council to provide input and ask questions about the plan.
Public hearings for final recommendation by the Commission and final action by the Council will follow shortly after the fifth and final community workshop and circulation of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for public review and comment.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
The DTSP provides the framework for development and redevelopment for both the historic, traditional commercial downtown along Bonita Avenue, as well as a vision for an expanded geographic area of downtown further east, west, and south of the traditional historic core. The goals and policies of the DTSP are aimed at encouraging a broader mix of land uses, while maintaining the human-scale and historic character of downtown, improving the economic base of the City, creating vibrant and safe public spaces, encouraging new residential development, and providing a variety of mobility options for the first and last mile connections to the future A Line Light Rail transit station.
The final determination of the plan boundaries was made by City Council at the October 12, 2021 study session, which expanded the boundary area to take advantage of opportunity sites, as identified in the Certified Housing Element Update, that can serve as catalysts for future revitalization of the Downtown. Existing established single-family neighborhoods surrounding the commercial core have been intentionally excluded from the DTSP boundaries in order to focus on areas of potential growth and to preserve the existing and historic single-family neighborhoods in the vicinity. The exact delineation of the DTSP area is outlined in red in Figure 1 below:
Draft Downtown Specific Plan Discussion Page 3
For the Meeting of November 16, 2023
Figure 1 - Downtown Specific Plan Boundary
The Draft DTSP is organized into ten chapters, all of which contain the vision, zoning standards and design guidelines, infrastructure design, and implementation procedures for all land within the plan area. After adoption of the plan, subsequent tract or parcel maps, development agreements, local public work projects, zoning text or map amendments, and any action requiring ministerial or discretionary approval related to Downtown San Dimas must be consistent with the DTSP. The planning area has been divided into six sub-areas: Gateway Village West, Gateway Village East, Transit Village, Town Core, Public/Semi-Public, and Open Space as shown in Figure 2 below.
Figure 2 - Downtown Specific Plan Areas
Draft Downtown Specific Plan Discussion Page 4
For the Meeting of November 16, 2023
The characteristics of the six sub-areas varies as a reflection of the different allowable land uses, building scale, architectural style, and development intensity for each of the respective areas.
Multi-family development will be permitted in all sub-areas with the exception of Public/SemiPublic and Open Space. In addition, to be in compliance with Housing Element for the 2021-2029 planning period, a Housing Element Sites Overlay has been included that identifies the sites that can accommodate the City’s assigned housing need as identified in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). These sites are located throughout the DTSP, with majority of the sites located within the Gateway Village West, which are in closer proximity to the freeway and away from existing single-family neighborhoods. In addition, the plan creates standards that will allow for more vibrancy and mixed-use development within the Transit Village, which surrounds the future A Line (formerly Gold Line) Light Rail transit station.
New development regulations such as the creation of “stepbacks” will help to control the massing and scale of new projects that are being proposed within the DTSP. These “stepbacks” will require new development to push back the third and fourth floors of buildings sited along important street frontages such as Bonita Avenue and San Dimas Avenue. The implementation of “stepbacks” will provide architectural relief and help to reduce the appearance of buildings that are over two (2) stories in height throughout the plan area. Design standards for building modulation will help break up large wall planes and help contribute to additional landscaping opportunities or creating spaces for people to gather. Additional standards such as minimum depth for ground floor commercial space is introduced in the plan area to allow for more functional spaces that will be conducive for restaurants, retail, and other uses that will further promote a pedestrian-friendly environment within the downtown.
The plan will also include design standards and guidelines that will not only provide clear guidance for property owners, developers, and City staff, but also to ensure new development will be consistent with the high quality architecture the City strives to maintain. All new projects will be required to comply with both the design standards and guidelines. However, projects that are eligible for streamlining under the State’s housing streamline legislation, which require 50 percent of the units to be affordable, among other eligible criteria, will only be subject to the design standards which are objective and do not involve any subjective judgement.
The DTSP will also introduce a Minor Conditional Use Permit (MCUP) approval process which will help streamline the approval process of certain land uses that will assist with the revitalization of the downtown area, but still allow for city staff to place conditions to protect the nearby neighborhoods. All of these new strategies and implementation tools along with various mitigation measures that will be incorporated into the EIR, will guide the City’s growth and all future development and redevelopment of the downtown area.
This is just a brief overview of the DTSP to provide the Commissioners a better understanding of the overall goals of the plan and touches on some of the key aspects of the plan. The goal of this meeting is to initiate a discussion and gather input from the Commission, which will be forwarded to the City Council. Both the Commission’s and Council’s comments will be incorporated into the DTSP and will be presented to the public at the fifth and final community workshop meeting. As previously mentioned, public hearings for final recommendation by the Commission and final action by the Council will follow shortly after the fifth and final community workshop and circulation of the EIR for public review and comment.
ALTERNATIVES
There is no alternative draft of the DTSP being proposed at this time.
Draft Downtown Specific Plan Discussion Page 5
For the Meeting of November 16, 2023
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The DTSP has been prepared in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is currently being prepared to respond to the anticipated environmental impacts associated with the DTSP and will be made available for public review likely in the upcoming months. Certain projects may require additional specific environmental review as necessary if they do not conform with the DTSP.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne Moore
Senior Planner
Attachments:
1. Draft Downtown Specific Plan
CITY OF SAN DIMAS
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regularly Scheduled Meeting
Thursday, November 16, 2023 at 7:00 p.m.
245 East Bonita Avenue, City Council Chamber
PRESENT
Chairman David Bratt
Vice-Chairman John Davis
Commissioner Margie Green
Commissioner Doran Barnes
Commissioner James Shirley
Interim Director of Community Development Luis Torrico
Senior Planner Anne Moore
Senior Planner Marco Espinoza
Senior Management Analyst Kimberly Neustice
CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE
Chairman Bratt called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:03 p.m. and Commissioner Shirley led the flag salute.
OTHER BUSINESS
OB 1. Draft Downtown Specific Plan Discussion
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico gave an overview of the Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) project and what this means for the City. There is no action required from the Commission tonight, only feedback on the draft DTSP. Commissioner Barnes has a conflict because he lives within the radius of three sub areas being discussed. There is no conflict related to the districts, boundaries, etc. so when it gets to discussion of the three sub areas that are within 500 feet of Commissioner Barnes’ residence, he will have to recuse himself from that portion of the discussion.
Senior Planner Moore provided a recap of the Downtown Specific Plan process so far, which has brought us to the draft document being presented tonight. The Draft EIR is still being prepared and once completed, it will be circulated for public review and comment prior to being presented to the Commission and the City Council. Additionally, we will be holding a fifth and final community workshop to get comments from the public on the draft early next year. She stated that Nick Pergakes and Jennifer Williams with our consultant Interwest will be giving the presentation tonight.
Mr. Pergakes with Interwest introduced his team and gave an overview of what will be discussed.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2
November 16, 2023
Mrs. Williams with Interwest continued the presentation and explained the different chapters of the DTSP, pointing out that chapter three explained the various districts being presented within the downtown specific plan.
Mr. Pergakes presented chapters five through nine and discussed that the next step will be to present this to City Council for comments. The CEQA document will be finished in early 2024 and then there will be a fifth community workshop to get the public’s comments.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico informed the Commission that we can move forward with discussing the document and questions for the consultant and allow Commissioner Barnes to take part in the discussion, and when it comes to narrowing the discussion down to specific sites, Commissioner Barnes can recuse himself from the discussion of the three sub areas within 500 feet of his residence.
Commissioner Barnes stated that he’s excited to see the draft document and what the future of the downtown could become. He thinks it would be interesting to see how underground parking will play out. While it’s preferred, it’s costly to build.
Vice-Chairman Davis thought the presentation and document was well thought out and comprehensive. He feels that the vision statement seems to be missing the word “entertainment.” He asked if that was intentional because entertainment was mentioned in other areas of the document. He felt that it should also be part of the vision statement.
Mr. Pergakes stated that entertainment was considered for the vision statement, but was left out intentionally. However, it could be added if requested.
Vice-Chairman Davis believes that entertainment should be added. He asked why the two triangular properties on the north side of the rail road were not included in the plans.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that there were a few discussions with the Council regarding these two parcels. At first, Staff included the sites but Council elected to remove them from the boundaries of the downtown area. After the first community meeting, the public felt they should be included, but Council still wanted to leave them out.
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that Gateway Village West is a very large area. It seemed to him that the property on the west side of Eucla should be part of Gateway Village West but going east from Eucla it seems like a transitional area into the downtown. Perhaps the Gateway Village West should be split up into two different areas, or the Town Core area can be extended to Eucla.
When reading the vision for Gateway Village East it seemed very light and brief. To him it’s an important part coming into Downtown and it seems like we didn’t really understand what the vision of this area could be. Additionally, the forestry site is in the public space area, but should be in the Gateway Village East.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that they show the forestry site as two different areas. The area that the forestry building is on is part of the public area and the area to the east, which is currently for sale, was put into Gateway Village East.
Vice-Chairman Davis wanted the person who takes on the forest site development to understand that this is a great place for homes and families to occupy. The vision statement for this area should discuss these types of things. He liked the bike path diagrams and integrating the paths in the streets. For Gateway Village West he asked if we know how many owners would the developer have to work with if they would like to make this whole area housing.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 3
November 16, 2023
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that there are multiple owners and it would require some land assembly on the developers’ part. As part of the Housing Element, the City is required to create a lot consolidation ordinance to incentivize the consolidation of Housing Element housing sites.
Commissioner Shirley inquired about the requirement for off-site parking to be sold or leased separately for for-sale units.
Mr. Pergakes stated that this is for renters and not intended to be used for for-sale units, and he will need to change the wording in the report.
Commissioner Shirley addressed the infrastructure section and stated that grade three moderate defects on infrastructure is estimated to deteriorate in the next ten to fifteen years, grade two is estimated to deteriorate in the next twenty years. While that seems like a long way off, it’s really not and we should be concerned about the infrastructure when a development is being proposed. Is it accurate that we could have some failure in the future and do we have a plan in place to address these possible failures?
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that as part of this document we are doing an EIR that will look at all the potential impacts of these developments. Part of this is to look at the sewer and storm drains to evaluate these types of issues. Each developer will be required to do a sewer or storm drain study to determine any potential failures and deficiencies.
Commissioner Green thanked the consultant for the great report. She has been to the community workshops throughout the process, which was very interesting. She knows that each development will have their own set of questions and answers when they propose their development to the City.
Chairman Bratt stated that he appreciates the detailed report and it’s a great document to get started. He believes we should have different design standards when developing next to singlefamily areas. Gateway Village East, for example, no one wants to have a house with a threestory building behind them. Perhaps we need to divide Gateway Village East and provide different standards for development adjoining the single-family areas. We should be cognizant in trying to blend the different areas together.
At this time Commissioner Barnes recused himself as the discussion will now concentrate on the sub areas within 500 feet of his property.
Mrs. Williams pointed out that within each district the report provides different standards for areas on certain streets or adjacent to certain uses.
Vice-Chairman Davis asked why we were allowing transitional and supportive housing in the four different areas.
Mr. Pergakes stated that there is a law that requires transitional and supportive housing to be allowed in any zone that allows multi-family.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that is a state law requirement and part of the requirement of the Housing Element so this will be coming to the Commission in the future as part of the change to our Municipal Code.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 4
November 16, 2023
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that transitional means they are out within six months where supportive is moving them into permanent housing. He asked if the project on Foothill is transitional?
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that it was proposed as permanent supportive housing.
Vice-Chairman Davis proposed a minimum of fifteen-foot set back requirements for residential and twenty feet for commercial. So, you could technically have a three to four story building fifteen feet from residential.
Mrs. Williams stated that the setbacks are from property line but the draft document is also proposing step backs for the second and third floors of these developments, which would put the additional two stories further back on the property.
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that maybe there should be no second story windows on that side of the house to allow for more privacy. If they want to have second story windows maybe move the step back to twenty feet. It states that you could have a terrace on the top of the second story but you wouldn’t want to have that only fifteen feet from the other property. You wouldn’t want to have people hanging out on the patio only fifteen feet from someone else’s backyard. Page 77 discusses public space in residential areas. Do we really want people from the public to have access to space inside a residential development?
Mrs. Williams stated that this is for larger projects that would require a publicly accessible component.
Vice-Chairman Davis asked that if you were to develop a multi-family project on the Forest Service site located within the Gateway Village East, would the developer need to have publicly accessible space or would you say that it would only be for the residents.
Mrs. Williams stated that it’s a good point and perhaps they shouldn’t require publicly accessible space in Gateway Village East since it doesn’t have the entertainment portion.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that this requirement would also apply to mixed-use developments.
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that on page 80 number six, it allows a maximum of seven tables and seats. Why would we put a maximum in the document and not just base it on the size of the restaurant? If you have a larger restaurant they might need more eating space. Page 86 references the DPRB and should probably be removed.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated they left that in there to reflect the current code and when that municipal code changes, the DTSP document will be changed accordingly.
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that page 115 discusses having a downtown core and fixing the buildings up. Can we add something about not fixing the building to the western theme and require to have more original features from the early 1900’s. The northwest corner of Bonita and Exchange where the overhang is falling apart, we would want them to remove it rather than fix it.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that the overall architectural style for the downtown is Early California.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 5
November 16, 2023
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that’s not western so we should say we want it to be more Early California rather than western. Can this be added to the document? He also asked if we would have to do any code changes based on this document.
Mrs. Williams stated there will be some changes, but this document will supersede the code for now. Planning may need to do some clean up in portions of the code, but this document will stand as the new standard.
Commissioner Shirley stated that on page 166 under new development, the increase in water needs were significant. He wanted to make sure that we will have enough water to continue to supply the City. Other cities have had issues with new developments and being able to provide water to the developments. He is concerned that we are considering where we are now and what will be proposed in the next twenty years and that we will have enough water so as not to have to fight for our water rights.
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that the plan shows where the City would need to potentially invest in the infrastructure portion such as more water and larger sewer systems. As each project comes up, it will need to be dealt with at that time. He asked if the City would assess fees for sewer? Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that there are different ways to accomplish this. Districts could be created to require impact fees to be paid. Each project will need to do their own analysis to see what the impacts are and how they will mitigate these impacts. When these funds come in, the City would use these fees to upgrade infrastructure.
Commissioner Shirley is worried about future droughts and he’s concerned that there might be some issues in the future and we should put a plan in place now to deal with this.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico when a project comes in, utility plans are submitted. The developers send out letters to the utilities letting them know about the development and the utilities would let the developer know what impacts they might be looking at and how they might need to resolve any potential issues.
Commissioner Green discussed the downtown core and preserving our history. She’s concerned about the way things will look when the light rail comes through. Some of the buildings need to be fixed up to look as good as the rest of the City and they are part of the first impression people will get about the City.
Chairman Bratt stated that when the train comes in they will mostly see the backsides of buildings so he feels that signage is going to be an important element for the back of the buildings and we should look at getting these areas fixed up a bit.
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that the Planning Commission comments will be recorded and sent to City Council for review.
Senior Planner Anne Moore stated that they will share the comments presented by the Planning Commission to the City Council and Council will provide us with their comments. Both will be incorporated into the revisions and then a community meeting will be held so the members of the public can see the revised document and then give their input on the document. The EIR will be available for public view and circulation when it is finished and will be available for the final hearing of the DTSP document.
Chairman Bratt stated that this isn’t a public hearing so a public comment period is not required, but if someone has something to say to the Commission they can come forward. Page 208 – 245 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6
November 16, 2023
Bob Olander asked after the eventual approval of the DTSP what could be the city’s attempt in using eminent domain to implement the DTSP.
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that the Commission can’t really answer that, but the Council maybe could.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that the document doesn’t have any language of eminent domain and the City doesn’t intend to use it. Just to clarify that laws have changed that make it more difficult for cities to use eminent domain and can only be used for public uses like parks.
Bob Olander referenced KELO Domain Supreme Court 2005 where land can be taken for private use if it has an economic benefit to the City.
Senior Planner Moore stated that the next step will be presenting this to Council on December 12, 2023 for their comments on the draft and this meeting will be noticed as well.
Mrs. William stated that public comments are encouraged and they can email comments to Anne Moore.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
a. Community Development Department
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico gave updates:
There is not much to report. There is nothing scheduled for the meetings in December, but we will let them know if anything gets scheduled. The next items being brought to commission will be the changes that are required by the Housing Element, including transitional/supportive housing in early 2024.
b. Members of the Audience
No communications at this time.
c. Planning Commission
Vice-Chairman Davis asked about the status of the tree ordinance.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that we are working on it and should possibly be bringing it in February 2024.
Vice-Chairman Davis asked when will we be changing meetings to once a month.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that we will be moving to once a month starting in January 2024 to the third Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m. If needed, we could schedule an additional meeting on the first Thursday but the standing Planning Commission meetings will be for the third Thursdays.
Chairman Bratt asked if we are working on combining DPRB into PC. Page 209 – 245 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7
November 16, 2023
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated yes, we are working on the code amendment regarding the entitlement process and we are looking to possibly bring that forward in March 2024, which will eliminate DPRB, but also other code changes that will make the entitlement process more streamlined.
Chairman Bratt asked about Planning Commission Academy and what is the plan for next year.
Interim Director of Community Development Torrico stated that we have budgeted for only new commissioners to attend.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Chairman Green moved, seconded by Commissioner Shirley. Motion carried 5-0.
The meeting adjourned at 8:31 p.m. to the regular Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for Thursday, December 7, 2023.
________________________________
David A. Bratt, Chairman
San Dimas Planning Commission
ATTEST:
_______________________
Kimberly Neustice
Senior Management Analyst
Approved:
CITY COUNCIL MEETING // DECEMBER 12, 2023
CITY OF SAN DIMAS
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC
PLAN
ATTACHMENT 3
MEETING AGENDA
I. Welcome and Update
II. Specific Plan Overview
III. Timeline
IV. Document Overview
V. Opportunity Sites
VI. Next Steps
VII. Questions and Answers
SPECIFIC PLAN OVERVIEW
Provides a vision for Downtown San
Dimas over the next 20 years
Creates a lively destination to support
the current and future economic base
Capitalizes on the new transit station
opening in 2025
Creates an in-town and regional
destination for San Dimas
SPECIFIC PLAN OVERVIEW
Establishes new zoning regulations for downtown
(permitted uses, building form, heights, setbacks, site design, etc.)
Enacts design standards to ensure quality architecture, landscape design, and site/building design
Ensures streets are safe and user- friendly for all
modes of travel
SPECIFIC PLAN TIMELINE
DOCUMENT OVERVIEW
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Vision, Downtown Framework, and Strategies Chapter 3: Zoning and Land Use
Chapter 4: Development Standards
Chapter 5: Design Standards and Guidelines
Chapter 6: Mobility
Chapter 7: Infrastructure
Chapter 8: Administration
Chapter 9: Implementation
Chapter 10: Glossary
Public Participation To-Date
MindMixer Website
First Community Meeting was held
virtually on February 23rd, 2022
Project Introduction and Overview
Breakout Groups- issues facing San
Dimas today & future opportunities
Second Community Meeting was held in
person on May 11th, 2022
Received input on where land uses and
activities should be located
CHAPTER 1
Public Participation To-Date
Third Community Meeting - August 11th, 2022
Reviewed draft land use plan/categories and
circulation/access
Fourth Community Meeting - March 29th, 2023
Open house style event to review preferred
draft land use plan and mobility
improvements
Planning Commission Study Session –
November 16th, 2023
Received questions and comments on draft
document from Planning Commission
CHAPTER 1
Vision Statement
Downtown is the heart of the City of San Dimas- a
walkable and vibrant activity center which celebrates and preserves its human-scale character for people of all ages, and provides a diversity of retail, restaurant, cultural, and civic uses, a variety of housing options, and creates local employment opportunities which breathe life and activity into the historic commercial center of the City.
CHAPTER 2
Goals
Human-scale environment with historic character
A diverse economy with a broad mix of land uses and activities Vibrant and active public and private spaces
A safe and comfortable pedestrian and cycling environment A range of housing types
Parking that is supportive of new uses and activities in downtown “First/last mile” connection to transit
Sustainable development
CHAPTER 2
Zoning and Land Use
Six zones
Each zone to
have unique
character,
allowable land
uses, and
development
standards
Housing
Element Sites
Overlay
CHAPTER 3
Gateway Village - West
Brings new activity and vibrancy to
the western portion of the SP area
Mixed-use buildings and
developments
Entertainment, retail, restaurant,
personal services, office, hotel,
residential
Commercial and open space
amenities required to be integrated
into new residential projects
Height and density concentrated
here
CHAPTER 3
Transit Village
Special zone for station-adjacent
parcels and blocks, build upon
the success of existing Grove
Station project. New
developments encouraged to
incorporate similar site design,
building form, and architectural
elements
Similar uses permitted as
Gateway Village West
High priority on pedestrianoriented site design
CHAPTER 3
Gateway Village - East
Transitional zone from
downtown to sensitive
existing established
surrounding residential uses
Variety of uses would be
permitted: residential,
commercial, retail, office and
personal services. Only zone
allowing for development to
be 100% residential
CHAPTER 3
Town Core
Traditional, historic downtown
segment of the specific plan area.
New development and
redevelopment projects required
to retain and reflect the historic
feel and scale of the buildings
Buildings 2-3 stories in height
Ground floor, pedestrian-oriented
uses required on Bonita and San
Dimas Avenue street frontages
CHAPTER 3
Public/Semi-Public
Public and semi-public uses for
the growth and general welfare of
the City
The district allows for joint use
and joint development
opportunities between public,
semi-public, and private uses
Example of uses include City
government offices, fire station,
sheriff station, post office, and
library
CHAPTER 3
Open Space
Open space and preservation of
natural resources for outdoor
recreation and education and for
public health and safety
Uses: Active and passive park,
outdoor plazas
No residential development
permitted
Any supporting/accessory
structures would be dependent
on their use and utility
CHAPTER 3
Excerpt of Land Use Table
CHAPTER 3
Development Standards
CHAPTER 4
Development standards will regulate:
Residential density
Building massing / floor area ratios
Number of stories and building heights
Required building setbacks from streets and surrounding lots Upper floor building stepbacks
Vehicular and bicycle parking space requirements
Open space and landscaping requirements
Excerpt of Development Standards Table
CHAPTER 4
Stepback Example – 3 Stories Next to Public Street
CHAPTER 4
Design Standards and Guidelines
Establish the design for new buildings or
adaptive reuse of existing buildings
Design standards are mandatory
requirements that must be satisfied in project
design
Objective design standards included to
meet recent state law for eligible housing
Design guidelines will also be included for
design objectives City wants to see, but not
mandatory
CHAPTER 5
Mobility
CHAPTER 6
Strategy 1: Design a network of complete streets that facilitates safe, comfortable, and accessible connections between destinations while maintaining the small-town character of Downtown.
Strategy 2: Improve connectivity to transit through the provision of high-quality bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, streetscape improvements, wayfinding signage, etc. Strategy 3: Design bicycle and pedestrian networks that are connected and prioritize the safety of all users.
Strategy 4: Develop and incorporate parking management strategies that encourage efficient use of parking resources and support initiatives that can reduce parking demand needs.
Strategy 5: Support transit-oriented land use development.
Infrastructure
CHAPTER 7
Existing conditions and proposed improvements to
serve the Downtown Specific Plan area
Sewer
Water
Storm Drain Systems
Electrical Services
Natural Gas
Telecommunications and Cable
Administration
CHAPTER 8
This Administration Section sets forth the administrative processes to review proposed land uses and development
Provides efficient entitlement processing guidance for future development and build-out of the Specific Plan
Streamlined review of multi-unit and mixed-use residential projects under new state laws
Implementation
CHAPTER 9
Area Specific Fees, Dedications, and Exactions
Special Districts (i.e. EIFD’s, Special Assessment
Districts, Business Improvement Districts)
Federal and State Grants
Implementation and Phasing
San Dimas Station North and
South Sites, which were
identified as Housing Element
opportunity sites
Concept illustrations show a
vision for what could occur in the
area in the future
New development would be built
and phased over many years
OPPORTUNITY SITES
OPPORTUNITY SITES
OPPORTUNITY SITES
Arrow Highway Looking Northwest
CEQA Document Public Review in early 2024
Community Workshop in early 2024
Adoption Hearings in Spring 2024
NEXT STEPS
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
THANK
YOU
CITY COUNCIL MEETING // DECEMBER 12, 2023
Include “entertainment” in Vision Statement
Expand discussion/purpose/vision on Gateway Village East in Section 2.4.4. Also consider more restrictive setbacks to buffer existing single-family residential from new multi-family construction.
Consider limiting windows on upper floors which face single-family residences For the area east of Eucla within the Gateway Village West zone to the Town Core zone, consider the creation of an additional zoning area or expanding the Town Core boundary further west In the Design Standards and Guidelines, remove limitations on number of tables allowed for outdoor dining. Provide for wayfinding signage to encourage visitors to downtown. Parking spaces in ownership (for-sale) multi-family units should not be unbundled. Leave unbundled for rentals (for-lease)
Consider explicitly stating that architectural style should be Early California and not Western Concerns that large multi-family developments, especially in Gateway Village East, would be required to have publicly accessible open space
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
Why weren’t 159 N. Acacia (General Pump) and 155 N. Eucla (L.A. Signal) included in plan area?
Why does US Forestry site show 2 zoning designations? How many units and what kind of units could be built at San Dimas Station North and South?
How will sewer and water infrastructure be accounted for over 20+ year horizon? Why is transitional housing allowed in Gateway Village zone? Should DPRB references be deleted?
PLANNING COMMISSION QUESTIONS