The discussion, led by consultant Jeff Weber, noted that, when a project was first proposed on the site some thirty years ago, the number of units zoned for the property was just under 250. This was when a notorious uprooting of a great number of oak trees took place, with many of them boxed and left on the property to die when the developer went belly up. That travesty was not forgotten as a few audience members well recalled the incident during the presentation.
Current developer K.V. Kumar and associates had a preliminary community meeting at the McCoy Equestrian Center in September 2015 and the link here is from a Chronicle post that goes into great detail about the project as it was proposed then. Among the elements at the time was that the number of units was 107 and they were spread out through a significant part of the site, including on some prominent higher points.
Since then, however, there has been a significant reduction in units, about half, and they have been even more clustered on about 60 acres (comprising just over 10% of the total acreage) toward the northeastern portion of the property, leaving the higher elevations of the site in open space. Much of this was to address concerns about visibility of those locales from Chino Hills State Park.
It was stated that new state standards for fuel modification zones are to be applied and some 450 trees, mostly oaks, are to be removed and the 2-1 ratio for replanting in compliance with a city oak tree ordinance. The units will have sewers and there will be a tie-in to the lift station built across Carbon Canyon Road for the Hillcrest subdivision, which takes the material out of the canyon to the northeast and into the Chino Hills system.
There were plenty of questions and comments from the audience, much of which had to do with the question of tree removal and replacement and how residents will be notified of future meetings, specifically those before the city's Planning Commission and City Council. There were a couple of outliers, one comment being that it would be better to spread out the units even on the more visible and prominent ridge lines because the current configuration would be too visible within the canyon. Another commenter suggested public access to trails leading through Hidden Oaks to Soquel Canyon, where a parking lot could be placed for easy connection to the state park—slyly, he added that he happened to own the property where he proposed the parking area be situated.
Generally, though, there didn't seem to be that much opposition to the project in totality and this may be a reflection of the fact that the number of units is drastically lower than the original zoning and that the clustering kept houses in lower elevations, preserving much more open space. Napoles quoted city council member Ray Marquez, a canyon resident, as being surprised that opposition was somewhat muted. Council member Peter Rogers, who also lives in Carbon Canyon, was pleased at the attendance and reminded that there will be plenty of opportunity for residents to share views with city staff as the project moves forward.
When traffic was discussed, it was noted that the significant increase in volume in recent years has largely been due to massive growth in the Inland Empire, a trend that will only accelerate. One persistent audience member kept asking council member Rogers when enough is enough with respect to development in the canyon and, unfortunately, there is no good answer, partially because, even if the canyon was closed off completely for more building, traffic will still increase dramatically because of the tens of thousands of units projected just for south Ontario and Chino alone, much less elsewhere.
So, stay tuned as Hidden Oaks becomes a lot less concealed to the public in its progression.
No comments:
Post a Comment