General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) General Plan Advisory Committee January 20, 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Forest Legacy Assessment of Need Identifying Future Forest Legacy Areas Governors Commission for Protecting the Chesapeake Bay through Sustainable Forestry.
Advertisements

Pinellas by Design: A Blueprint for Updating the Countywide Plan Pinellas Planning Council May 18, 2011.
TA Environmentally Sensitive Areas. Current Features: 1.Floodways, 100 yr 2.Floodplain, outside floodway, 100 yr 3.Jurisdictional Wetlands 4.Stream.
THE EXPANDING ROLE of RECYCLED WATER The Need, Benefits and Cost Effectiveness Make Recycled Water an Increasingly Valued Resource Harry Ehrlich, SDA Principal.
Shoreline Master Program Update. Shoreline Management Act approved by voters in the early 1970’s to: – Encourage water-dependent uses – Protect shoreline.
Transportation Strategy Board July 28, 2010 Responsible Growth.
Santa Ana Region Stormwater Permit TMDL Requirements and Costs
General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) General Plan Advisory Committee May 06, 2009.
How We Shall Live in Volusia County? Florida Department of Community Affairs June 16, 2007 Charles Gauthier, AICP.
DRIs After 360. Transportation Methodology § (7) PREAPPLICATION PROCEDURES.— The levels of service required in the transportation methodology shall.
El Cajon Courtyard Excel Hotel Group July 1, 2014.
CPA-02-14/ZOM Parker 26, LLC Small Scale Comp Plan Amendment and Rezoning.
Proposed Modification of Policies for Rural Employment Centers Policy 6.3 of the Future Land Use Element of the Alachua County Comprehensive plan CPA
Town of New Hartford Southern Area GEIS Summary Presentation Planning Board Meeting Monday, June :30 pm.
1 SUSTAINING AGRICULTURE: SANTA CLARA LAFCO’s EXPERIENCE August 31, 2007 CALAFCO CONFERENCE Sacramento.
South West Study Area Introduction ► Summary of Study Area ► Unified Development Code Amendments ► Points of Interest ► Staff Recommendation ► Review.
High Growth Counties: Opportunities for Pinal County Pinal County Comprehensive Plan Curt Dunham AICP Partners for Strategic Action, Inc. Comprehensive.
KING COUNTY CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE Harry Reinert King County Department of Development and Environmental Services.
1 Preservation Parcels Investigation Report to the Board of County Commissioners September 19, :30 PM.
Sector Planning Process Alachua County Commission July 8 th,
Community Development Department Neoga Lakes – Development of Regional Impact (DRI) Master Planned Development (MPD) Rezoning Application.
Navigating SB 375: CEQA Streamlining and SB 743 Transportation Analysis 2014 San Joaquin Valley Fall Policy Conference.
Planning for Smart Growth in Rural New Hampshire SWRPC Southwest Region Planning Commission.
Flintstone-Oldtown Planning Region Comprehensive Plan Kick-Off Meeting June 23, 2010 Insert pictures.
Legal Regulations for High School Road II BAINBRIDGE ISLAND MUNICIPAL CODES & COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONDITIONAL USES.
Presentation to the Placer LAFCO Commission September 10, 2014.
UPlan: How It Works and How to Get Started A description for the rest of us Nathaniel Roth Information Center for the Environment University of California,
Application LU-MIN Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Twenty Fingers Property May 2007 PLDRB.
CPA-14-08: Transfer of Development Rights Large Scale Text Amendment Adoption Hearing Board of County Commissioners September 23, 2008.
Annexations as a Means to Preserve Open Space October 29, 2009.
February 20, 2007 Macon County Planning Board. Structure Height Ordinance Allows construction to 4 stories or 48 feet, whichever is greater Measured from.
Clark County Comprehensive Plan: Unique Opportunities and Resolutions. Land Use in Southwestern Washington Law Seminars International Vancouver Hilton.
Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code - MPC State enabling legislation for all municipalities except Pittsburgh and Philadelphia Newly Elected Officials.
Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments Wekiva Parkway and Protection Act December 18, 2007 Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments Wekiva Parkway and Protection.
Community Development Department FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT SMALL-SCALE LU-MIN & ZONING MAP AMENDMENT RZ-OTH
Eastside Activity Center Zoning Overlay District and Amended Land Development Regulations.
Secondary & Cumulative Effects Analysis Training Program Module 4: How to Develop SCEA Land Use Information How to Develop Land Use Information.
North West Study Area Staff Recommendation Tuesday, September 22, 2009.
 Kevin Behm – Addison County Regional Planning Commission  Kevin Behm – Addison County Regional Planning Commission Community Build-Out.
Community Development Department FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT GRAND HAVEN NORTH CONSERVATION AREA APPLICATION # 2604.
Planning & Community Development Department Zoning Code Amendment Public Hearing Proposed elimination of the 50% review step from the design review process.
Growth Management Legislative Discussion: Transportation Concurrency April 24, 2012 Growth Management Legislative Discussion: Transportation Concurrency.
MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEWS. Spheres of Influence and Municipal Service Reviews Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg.
Orange County’s Comprehensive Policy Plan Adoption Public Hearing May 19, 2009 Orange County’s Comprehensive Policy Plan Adoption Public.
2015 Growth Policy Update – Lewis & Clark County RGA UGA George Thebarge, AICP Director of Community Development & Planning Lewis & Clark County Cole Peebles,
Growth Management Legislative Discussion June 19, 2012 Growth Management Legislative Discussion June 19, 2012.
1 Regional Activity Centers and Clusters Presentation to National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board Paul DesJardin Department of Human Services,
“ Grand Landings North” Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Rezoning City Council Public Hearing March 3, 2015.
Regional Planning CCRPC Board Training March 21, 2012.
Community Redevelopment for Eastside Report on Advisory Committee Input and Request for Board Direction June 26, 2012.
City of Grover Beach, San Luis Obispo County 1 Grover Beach.
Durham Villas Planned Unit Development TSM & REZ Morris Bud Keeney Butte County Board of Supervisors December 11, 2012.
Planning Commission Study Session: Preferred Plan July 23, 2015.
2013 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE: COMMUNITY MEETING MARION COUNTY GROWTH SERVICES.
Community Development Department Rezone Application #1783 Parcel ID No RPOF-0031.
Highlights  Describe Our Missoula Growth Policy Project  Relationship to Rattlesnake Neighborhood Plan  Next Steps.
“State Road 100 MPC Lots” Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Rezoning City Council Public Hearing November 17, 2015.
ANNEXATION Statutory Overview July 19, 2011 David L. Yearout, AICP, CFM.
Community Development Department FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT SMALL-SCALE LU-MIN-07-03a & ZONING MAP AMENDMENT RZ-OTH
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE MEETING 1 – ANNEXATION, PLANNING AREA, AND DENSITIES 11/07/2013.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL. Recent Projects  University Village Local Area Plan (2015)  Active Transportation Plan (2014)  Trans Canada.
Council Grove Zoning & Planning Committee Final Plan Presentation March 9, 2016.
Clark County 20-Year Comprehensive Management Plan Update Unified Development Code : Title 40 Updates Community Planning PC WS ~ March 17, 2016.
Hillsborough County Public School Siting MPO SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP
Growth Management Amendments Land Use & Transportation
Jefferson County SA Red Rocks Site Approval
MPO School Transportation Working Group
Regulation Amendment AM April 3, 2018.
Comprehensive Plan Update Work Session #4b – Land Use
Presentation transcript:

General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) General Plan Advisory Committee January 20, 2009

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) General Plan Amendment 960 – Schedule of Meetings

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Written Letters/Comments (Provided in Information Packet) Dr. Dan Silver, Executive Director, EHL Oral Communication/Meeting Dennis Chiniaeff, GPAC Chair Significant issues/comments General Plan Amendment 960 – Comments and Letters

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) General Plan Amendment 960 – Comments and Letters Significant Issues/Comments 8-yearly Cycle for Certainty System Rural Incidental Commercial Rural Village Overlays Landowner Initiated Foundation Component GPAs

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Presentation Item – Appendix E Last GPAC Meeting Questions about county’s build-out and growth potential Bi-weekly Staff Meetings with Transportation, Demographic Research and GIS Appendix E – Socioeconomic Build-out Assumptions and Methodology Appendix F – Population and Employment Forecast

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Appendix E – Socioeconomic Build-out Assumptions and Methodology Complete and Accurate Information Presentation Item – Appendix E

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Presentation Item – Appendix E

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Presentation Item – Appendix E

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Presentation Item – Appendix E

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Appendix F – Population and Employment Forecast Presentation Item – Appendix F

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Information Items – Aguanga and Sky Valley Rural Villages Aguanga Rural Village Study Area – REMAP REMAP Proposed Draft Commercial and Residential Study Scenario 1 – GP Boundary – 6000 acs Scenario 2 – Reduced in size – 2000 acs Scenario 3 – Reduced size – 300 acs Sky Valley Rural Village Overlay – Western Coachella Valley Area Plan Proposal – Keep as is 5 ac of commercial with EDR

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Action Item – Draft Incidental Rural Commercial Policy Draft Land Use Element – Rural and Rural Community Foundation Component Rural incidental commercial uses in the outlying rural areas of the county along rural highway corridors for the convenience of residents and travelers are allowed. The development standards for these commercial uses should reflect areas where urban services and facilities are generally unavailable and are not likely to be provided in the near future. The type of uses allowed and the development standards shall be in accordance to the Rural Commercial (C-R) Zone (AI 1).

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Action Item – Draft Incidental Rural Commercial Policy Draft Land Use Element – Rural and Rural Community Foundation Component 1. The portion of the lot proposed for small-scale commercial development shall be between 0.5 and 2.5 acres. 2. The design and scale of the commercial development are encouraged to be compatible with the surrounding uses, protect view sheds and blend in with the rural nature of the area. 3. The portion of the lot used for small-scale commercial development is encouraged to be located adjacent to an arterial, mountainous arterial or major roadway. However, it is discouraged to be located within 300 feet of a freeway. 4. Rural incidental commercial uses may not be located within 2 miles of a Commercial land use designation of the Community Development foundation component.

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Action Item – Draft Incidental Rural Commercial Policy Staff Recommendation Approval of Draft Land Use Element for Rural and Rural Community Foundation Components – January 05, 2009 draft as proposed

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Action Item – El Cariso and Meadowbrook Rural Villages

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Action Item – Draft El Cariso Rural Village Study Area Elsinore Area Plan, District 1 MSHCP Highway/Major Road Proximity Land Use Compatibility Redevelopment Area Water Districts Floodplain Fire Potential Slope Sewer Capacity Faults/ subsidence/ liquefaction etc.

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Issues of Environmental Consideration Surrounded by Conservation Habitat lands High Wild-Fire Susceptibility Limited Access Hwy 74 – State eligible scenic highway Northern end- steep slopes and landslide potential Proposed Incidental Rural Commercial Policy Action Item – Draft El Cariso Rural Village Study Area

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Action Item – Draft El Cariso Rural Village Study Area

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Eliminate El Cariso RVSA Action Item – Draft El Cariso Rural Village Study Area

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Draft Elsinore Area Plan Language ELAP 6.3 The spatial analysis indicated that the increase in intensity of uses in El Cariso Rural Village is not necessary at this particular time, thus resulting in removing the boundaries of the Rural Village Study Area established in the RCIP General Plan. Some newly introduced policies such as the Incidental Rural Commercial Policy of the General Plan 2008 could be utilized to achieve the similar objectives of the Rural Village Study Area. Action Item – Draft El Cariso Rural Village Study Area

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Staff Recommendation Approval of Draft Elsinore Area Plan – January 05, 2009 – ELAP 6.3 as Proposed Action Item – Draft El Cariso Rural Village Study Area

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Action Item – Draft El Cariso Rural Village Study Area Issues for Discussion Need for Change Size of Overlay Allowed land uses within the Overlay MDR, MHDR, LI, and CR Recommended Motion

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Action Item – Draft Meadowbrook Rural Village Land Use Overlay Elsinore Area Plan, District 1 MSHCP Highway/Major Road Proximity Land Use Compatibility Redevelopment Area Water Districts Floodplain Fire Potential Slope Sewer Capacity Faults/ subsidence/ liquefaction etc.

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Issues of Environmental Consideration Surrounded by existing cities Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Canyon Lakes and Perris Located along a major regional connector State Hwy 74 between I-15 and I-215 Community’s interest Action Item – Draft Meadowbrook Rural Village Land Use Overlay

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Action Item – Draft Meadowbrook Rural Village Land Use Overlay

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Action Item – Draft Meadowbrook Rural Village Land Use Overlay

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Draft Elsinore Area Plan Language ELAP 6.1 Allow areas designated with the Rural Village Land Use Overlay to develop according to the standards of this section. Otherwise, the standards of the underlying land use designation shall apply. ELAP 6.2 In the Meadowbrook Land Use Overlay, commercial uses, small-scale industrial uses (including mini-storage facilities), and residential uses at densities higher than those levels depicted on the Area Plan may be approved as designated in the overlay. Additionally, existing commercial and industrial uses may be relocated to this Rural Village Land Use Overlay as necessary in conjunction with the widening of State Highway Route 74. Action Item – Draft Meadowbrook Rural Village Land Use Overlay

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Staff Recommendation Approval of Draft Elsinore Area Plan – January 05, 2009 – ELAP 6.1 and 6.2 as proposed Action Item – Draft Meadowbrook Rural Village Land Use Overlay

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Issues for Discussion Need for Change Size of Overlay Allowed land uses within the Overlay MDR, MHDR, LI, and CR Recommended Motion Action Item – Draft Meadowbrook Rural Village Land Use Overlay

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Optional Item – Draft Areas Subject to Indian Jurisdiction Language Draft Land Use Element Policies LU 32.1 The County of Riverside will continue to work with Tribal authorities to forge inter-governmental agreements in situations where such agreements would be mutually beneficial. In the absence of agreements specifying otherwise, questions regarding development within areas subject to Indian jurisdiction should be referred to the applicable Tribal authorities except in case of fee lands where the local jurisdiction and tribe share the land use authority. (AI 4) LU 32.2 All new development proposals within fee lands should be consistent with the land use pattern and designations of the surrounding areas of the tribal and county jurisdiction. Developments of the fee lands shall be subject to the current Riverside County development and permitting procedures.

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Staff Recommendation Approval of Draft Land Use Element – January 05, 2009 – LU 32.1 and 32.2 as proposed Optional Item – Draft Areas Subject to Indian Jurisdiction Language

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) San Jacinto Valley Area Plan, District 3 Policy when Agriculture Foundation Component was subject to 5-year cycle Adoption of the General Plan in 2003 and Agriculture is exempt from 5-year cycle No need for the policy Optional Item – Draft Ag/Potential Development Special Study Area

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Eliminate Study Area Optional Item – Draft Ag/Potential Development Special Study Area

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Staff Recommendation Approval of Draft San Jacinto Valley Area Plan – January 05, 2009 – Draft Agriculture/Potential Development Special Study Area as proposed Optional Item – Draft Ag/Potential Development Special Study Area

General Plan 5-Yearly Update General Plan Advisory Committee | January 20, 2009 General Plan Amendment 2008 (960) Thank you General Plan Amendment 960