Prado Regional Park Master Plan by KTUA

ii | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Acknowledgements San Bernardino County

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)

Diana Alexander, Deputy Executive Officer, Community Services Group

Matthew Ballantyne, City of Chino, City Manager

Beahta Davis, Director, Regional Parks Department

David Doublet, County of San Bernardino Deputy Director of Public Works

Leonard X. Hernandez, Chief Operating Officer, County Administrative Office

Tom Haughey, City of Chino, Council Member

Katherine Kolcheva, San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors

Jeremy Palazzo, San Bernardino County Regional Parks Operations Chief

Steven Raughley, Manager, Library Services Department

Steve Samaras, San Bernardino County Special Districts Department Division Manager

Marilee RendulIch, Manager, Real Estate Services Department

Nicole Van Winkle, San Bernardino County Park Advisory Commission

Jennifer Goodell, Acquisition Agent

Bob Fontaine, Prado Regional Park

Robert Messenger

Ryan Isom, Interim Parks Operations Chief

Dawn Martin, Deputy County Counsel Kristie Stevens, Regional Parks Department Keith Burke, Manager, Real Estate Services Department Casandra Quick, Real Estate Property Agent

Community Advisory Committee Carolyn Bell, City of Ontario, Senior Landscape Planner Rafael Gonzalez, CPRP, Jurupa Community Services District Louis Gamache, San Bernardino County Park Advisory Commission Ray Marquez, City of Chino Hills, Council Member

Office of Fourth District Chairman Curt Hagman Curt Hagman, Chairman, Fourth District Jeff Sorenson, San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors

Jonathan Marshall, City of Chino Hills, Community Services Director David Montgomery-Scott, City of Corona Library and Recreation Services Director Linda Reich, City of Chino, Community Services Director Peter Rogers, City of Chino Hills, Council Member/San Bernardino County 4th District Director Dan Silver, Endangered Habitats League, Executive Director Jeff Sorenson, San Bernardino County 4th District Policy Director

Prepared By:

Bob Mitchell, Commissioner Chair

KTUA

Melissa Russo, San Bernardino County Museum

Michael Baker International

Rhonesia Perry, EDA San Bernardino County

GreenPlay LLC

Mary Ann Ruiz, City of Chino

Table of Contents | iii

Table of Contents

1 2

Project Introduction and Overview 1.1 Purpose and Objectives........................................................................................2 1.2 Regional and Local Site Locations...................................................................2

4.1 Recreation and Park Demographic Profile................................................. 78 4.2 Influencing Trends of Recreation and Users.............................................84

1.3 Planning Process....................................................................................................5

4.3 Recreational Market Areas..............................................................................95

1.4 Vision Statement and Supporting Goals...................................................... 6

4.4 Existing Recreation in the Market Area.....................................................101

1.5 Primary Guidance...................................................................................................7

4.5 Revenue sources in the park........................................................................ 105

Existing Conditions

4.6 Initial Market Demand and Feasibility Analysis..................................... 107

2.1 History of the Site................................................................................................14 2.2 E xisting Overall Site Statistics........................................................................ 17 2.3 Existing Overall Site Setting............................................................................18

Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand

Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis 5.1 Site Analysis Overview...................................................................................... 116 5.2 GIS Modeling Process: COLA......................................................................... 118

2.4 Existing and Surrounding Land Uses...........................................................20

5.3 Constraints.......................................................................................................... 118

2.5 Natural Resource Conditions.........................................................................26

5.4 Opportunities.................................................................................................... 122

2.6 Man-Made Resource Conditions..................................................................48

5.5 Liabilities............................................................................................................. 126

Community and Stakeholder Engagement

5.6 Assets................................................................................................................... 128

3.1 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Input................................................62

5.7 GIS Modeling Results....................................................................................... 132

3.2 Community Advisory Committee (CAC) Input.........................................62

5.8 Environmental Sensitivity & Appropriate Uses...................................... 138

3.3 Community Workshops...................................................................................63

5.9 Fire and Emergency Exits..............................................................................140

3.4 Questionnaires (Surveys).................................................................................70

5.10 Circulation Opportunities............................................................................. 141

iv | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Table of Contents cont.

Appendix

6 7

A B C

Alternatives Development 6.1 Park Land Use Alternatives............................................................................ 146 6.2 Park Circulation and Entry Options .......................................................... 154 6.3 Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process..............................................160

Recommendations 7.1 Park Land Use ..................................................................................................... 162 7.2 Interim Park Land Uses................................................................................... 162 7.3 Circulation Improvements............................................................................. 164

7.4 Site Concept Plans and Renderings........................................................... 169

Implementation 8.1 Inundation Factors........................................................................................... 197 8.2 Proposed Grading Concept.......................................................................... 197 8.3 Site Area Assignments.................................................................................... 197 8.4 Conceptual Construction and Operational Costs ............................... 201 8.5 Recommended Phasing and Public Priorities......................................... 211 8.6 Likely Funding Sources.................................................................................... 211 8.7 Wide Range of Funding Sources................................................................... 211 8.8 Parking and Traffic Impact Strategies .....................................................222 8.9 Environmental Review Framework........................................................... 224

Existing Traffic Conditions...........................................A-1

Initial Review CEQA Checklist......................................A-7

Environmental Strategies & Considerations.................A-18

Table of Contents | v

List of Figures Figure 1-1: Regional Map.............................................................................................3

Figure 2-15: Expansive Soils - Soil Suitability....................................................41

Figure 1-2: Study Area................................................................................................. 4

Figure 2-16: Erodible Soils.......................................................................................43

Figure 1-3: Planning Process Diagram....................................................................5

Figure 2-17: Existing Land Cover...........................................................................45

Figure 1-4: Corps of Engineers Land Use ............................................................ 9

Figure 2-18: Existing Vegetation Condition....................................................... 47

Figure 1-5: Corps of Engineers Inundation Line................................................10

Figure 2-19: Existing Buildings...............................................................................49

Figure 1-6: Prop 70 Map............................................................................................12

Figure 2-20: Existing Utilities..................................................................................51

Figure 2-1: Historic Aerials and Maps...................................................................15

Figure 2-21: Easements and Rights-of-Way.....................................................53

FIGURE 2-1: Historic Aerials (cont.)........................................................................16

Figure 2-22: General Location of Cultural or Historic Features................. 55

Figure 2-2: Overall Site Map....................................................................................19

Figure 2-23: Existing Roads and Parking.......................................................... 57

Figure 2-3: Existing Land Uses...............................................................................21

Figure 2-24: Existing Park Entries........................................................................59

Figure 2-4: Existing Surrounding Land Uses..................................................... 22

Figure 2-25: Sub-regional Roadway Network..................................................60

Figure 2-5: Future Surrounding Land Uses....................................................... 23

Figure 4-1: Market Area Overview........................................................................ 78

Figure 2-6: Existing Concessions and Land Lease Locations.................... 25

Figure 4-2: Projected Population Trends from 2000 to 2024................... 78

Figure 2-7: Geological Features............................................................................. 27

Figure 4-3: Median Age of Prado Regional Park 2010 and 2024...............80

Figure 2-8: Soil Features..........................................................................................28

Figure 4-4: 2019 Age Distribution in Prado Regional Park...........................80

Figure 2-9: Landform................................................................................................29

Figure 4-5: Median Household Income Distribution .....................................81

Figure 2-10: Sensitive Species................................................................................31

Figure 4-6: Employment Overview California ................................................82

Figure 2-11: Hydrologic Conditions......................................................................33

Figure 4-7: County Health Ranking......................................................................82

Figure 2-12: FEMA 100-Year Flood Zone............................................................. 35

Figure 4-8: 2019 California Health Ranking Overview..................................83

Figure 2-13: Inundation Levels............................................................................... 37

Figure 4-9: Outdoor Recreation Behavior of Market Area...........................85

Figure 2-14: Slope Analysis.....................................................................................39

Figure 4-10: Fitness and Wellness Participation of Market Area...............85

vi | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

List of Figures (Cont.) Figure 4-11: Team Sport Household Participation..........................................86

Figure 6-2: Alternative #2 Park Land Use....................................................... 149

Figure 4-12: Fitness Participation by Generation...........................................89

Figure 6-3: Alternative #3 Park Land Use........................................................ 151

Figure 4-13: Golf Participation, Year after Year (1986 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2009)....................90

Figure 6-4: Alternative #4 Park Land Use....................................................... 153

Figure 4-14: Travelsheds Overview.......................................................................96

Figure 6-5: Alternative #1 Circulation and Gates.......................................... 155

Figure 4-15: Regional Market Area....................................................................... 97

Figure 6-6: Alternative #2 Circulation and Gates..........................................157

Figure 4-16: Sub-Regional Market Area..............................................................98

Figure 6-7: Alternative #3 Circulation and Gates......................................... 158

Figure 4-17: Expanded-Community Market Area...........................................99

Figure 6-8: Alternative #4 Circulation and Gates........................................ 159

Figure 4-18: Local Community Market Area...................................................100

Figure 7-1: Proposed Land Use............................................................................ 163

Figure 5-1: Biological Sensitivity.......................................................................... 119

Figure 7-2: Proposed Circulation........................................................................ 167

Figure 5-2: Areas of Previous Investments...................................................... 121

Figure 7-3: Key Map for Study Areas................................................................. 169

Figure 5-3: Soil Suitability..................................................................................... 123

Figure 7-4: Project Study Areas and Sub-areas........................................... 170

Figure 5-4: Levels of Disturbance...................................................................... 125

Figure 7-5: West Side Concept Plan...................................................................173

Figure 5-5: Hydrologic Suitability........................................................................127

Figure 7-6: North Central Concept Plan...........................................................175

Figure 5-6: Proximity to Existing Improvements.......................................... 129

Figure 7-7: Central Concept Plan.........................................................................177

Figure 5-7: Development Suitability Based on Natural Elements.......... 133

Figure 7-8: Community Performing Arts Center........................................... 183

Figure 5-8: Development Suitability Based on Man-Made Element..... 135

Figure 7-9: East Side Concept Plan................................................................... 185

Figure 5-9: Opportunities and Constraints Summary.................................137

Figure 8-1: Inundation Risk................................................................................... 198

Figure 5-10: Development and Roadway Improvements.......................... 143

Figure 8-2: Conceptual Grading Plan................................................................ 199

Figure 5-11: Future Required Roadway Improvements............................... 144

Figure 8-3: Overlay of Proposed Site Plans...................................................200

Figure 6-1: Alternative #1 Park Land Use..........................................................147

Table of Contents | vii

List of Tables Table 3-1: User Survey Results: Sorted By Category, Weighted................. 74

Table 8-6: East Side Study Area Conceptual Estimate............................. 206

Table 3-2: User Survey Results: Sorted by Top Weighted Scores ............. 75

Table 8-7: East Side Study Area Conceptual Estimate, Continued....... 207

Table 3-3: User Survey Results: Sorted by Top Unweighted Scores........ 76

Table 8-8: Summary of West and North Central Study Areas................ 208

Table 4-1: Prado Regional Park Gender Distribution......................................80

Table 8-9: Summary of South Central Study Area...................................... 209

Table 4-2: 2019 Educational Attainment...........................................................81

Table 8-10: Summary of East Side Study Area.............................................. 210

Table 4-3: 2019 Recreational Expenditures in Market Area........................84

Table 8-11: Bike, Pedestrian, Hiking and Equestrian Trail Summary....... 210

Table 4-4: Sports Trends.........................................................................................92

Table 8-12: Comparison of Public Priorities and Project Phasing............ 211

Table 4-5: Cycling and Trail Recreation Participation...................................93

Table 8-13: Phasing Funding per Year................................................................. 211

Table 4-6: Water Parks within 100 Miles of Prado........................................ 102

Table 8-14: Phasing Priorities by Study Area.................................................. 212

Table 4-7: Equestrian Parks within 100 Miles of Prado.............................. 103

Table 8-15: Likely Funding Sources for Prado................................................. 213

Table 4-8: Soccer Centers within 100 Miles of Prado.................................104

Table 8-16: Federal Funding Sources................................................................. 214

Table 5-1: Existing Improvements Summary.................................................. 130

Table 8-17: State Funding Sources..................................................................... 216

Table 5-2: Recreation Matrix................................................................................ 139

Table 8-18: Local Funding Sources.................................................................... 218

Table 5-3: Future Roadway Improvements and Developments............. 142

Table 8-19: Transportation Management Strategies...................................222

Table 8-1: General Inundation Zones ............................................................... 197

Table 8-20: Environmental Review Costs...................................................... 228

Table 8-2: West Side Study Area Conceptual Estimate............................ 202 Table 8-3: North Central Study Area Conceptual Estimate..................... 203 Table 8-4: South Central Study Area Conceptual Estimate.................... 204 Table 8-5: South Central Study Area Conceptual Estimate.................... 205

viii | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

Project Introduction and Overview

2 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

1 Project Introduction and Overview 1.1 Purpose and Objectives

1.2 Regional and Local Site Locations

The Prado Regional Park Master Plan (PRPMP) is a planning effort that will serve as a vision and a blueprint for future changes in Prado Regional Park. The plan is meant to be both visionary as well as practical. An overall goal is to provide a range of ideas that can be considered for the improvement of the park, while at the same time preserving other areas of the park. This plan embraces the parkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s natural resources and provides opportunities to allow park patrons to see and understand the rich agricultural heritage and natural conditions of the park. The plan is intended to identify changes that can occur in the immediate future, as well as the next 20 years. The overall horizon year for the plan is 2040, although an update of this plan should occur prior to 2030.

Prado Regional Park is located in southern California in the County of San Bernardino, Figure 1-1. It is unique in that the park is surrounded by three counties, including Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside. The park sits among the cities of Eastvale, Chino, Chino Hills, Corona, and Norco, Figure 1-2. Prado Regional Park is a total of 2,519 acres, including 2,251 acres leased from the Army Corps of Engineers and 268 acres purchased with Proposition 70 funding, Figure 1-6.

The PRPMP is an important and exciting opportunity that will help the County take the necessary actions to improve park amenities and experiences so that its potential as a major destination that provides fun, family-friendly attractions and amenities can be realized. The PRPMP respects the natural resources within the park by protecting and enhancing the environment while providing unique and engaging opportunities for visitors. The PRPMP will also maintain the diversity of available activities and opportunities that so many people have come to love. All of this will be possible with updated strategies that will aid the County of San Bernardino in operating a fiscally-responsible regional park. Project objectives include: 1. Determining what the park can become given the interests of the community and the capabilities of the resources of the park. 2. Suggesting areas of the park where changes can and should occur and other areas of the park that should be protected or enhanced based on a thorough review of the site conditions (Constraints, Opportunities, Liabilities and Assets-COLA). 3. Providing a vision that will stir the imagination of what the park can become, while realizing that unrealistic dreams can sometimes result in the plan just sitting on the shelf because of limitations of budgets and complexity of implementation. 4. Determining how the park is being used and what works efficiently, as well as areas that may not be efficient, accessible or in a sustainable state of use. 5. Suggesting a range of uses that can be verified by possible users of the park and documenting this range for future consideration. 6. Narrowing down the range of uses to the most supportable and synergistic combination that will help the park realize its potential vision. 7. Conducting initial review of the feasibility and issues associated with the recommendations. 8. Mapping out the steps needed to implement the vision and recommendations.

The region, once occupied by dairy farms, has seen significant growth over the past decade and continues to expand with new residential developments throughout the valley and the adjacent hills. Views from the park to the distant mountains of the San Gabriel Mountain Range and Chino Hills State Park provide a nice backdrop and enhance the unique character of the site. The park and the surrounding hillsides are important contributors to much-needed open space and natural character that sits amongst an otherwise urban and suburban area. The southern California region consists of 21 million persons that live within 100 miles of the Prado Regional Park site. This region is known for its diversity of urban form, natural settings, and unique demographics and cultures.

View of Prado Regional Park looking south from Pine Avenue

Chapter 1: Introduction | 3

Figure 1-1: Regional Map

4 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan Fontana Walnut

Pomona

60 ¬

10 § ¦ ¨

Industry

Ontario

Los Angeles County

Chino

Diamond Bar

Jurupa Valley

San Bernardino County

57 ¬

Eastvale

¬ 142

71 ¬

83 ¬

Chino Hills

15 § ¦ ¨

Prado Regional Park

Orange County Brea

Norco

Riverside

Riverside County

MAP C-1: PARK BOUNDARIES Yorba Linda

PRADO REGIONAL PARK MASTER PLAN Orange County

Monrovia Glendora

Azusa

Upland

Los Angeles County El Monte

West Covina

Fontana

Rialto

San Bernardino County

Pomona

Placentia

Jurupa Valley

Chino

Whittier

Chino Hills Brea

Eastvale Riverside

Norco Yorba Linda

Fullerton

Riverside County

Corona

March ARB Mead Valley

Anaheim

Orange County

91 ¬

Colton

Ontario

Walnut

Corona

Home Gardens El Sobrante

1 inch = 3,111.16 feet

Lake Mathews Perris

Orange

[

Coronita

Santa Ana

Anaheim

Irvine

0.5

Orange

Figure 1-2: Study Area

4 Miles

¬ 241

El Cerrito

Chapter 1: Introduction | 5

1.3 Planning Process The overall planning process is documented in Figure 1-3. The process needs to be comprehensive in its nature and logical in its direction. Any of the steps shown in Figure 1-3 that are skipped can result in improper recommendations, the wrong priorities or unimplementable plans. Although variations to the order of these steps do occur, they should generally be completed in the sequence shown.

10 Steps to Comprehensive Master Planning This 10-step process is needed to ensure a comprehensive, transparent, and logical set of defined issues, findings, and recommendations. The following steps were used by this project:

Discuss the project with staff, the general public, concessionaires, elected officials, and potential park users. Review previous efforts, documents, plans, and special studies identifying what worked vs. what did not come to fruition. Explore the park and obtain an understanding of its uniqueness, constraints, and assets. Ask for opinions on what the park should include through surveys, examples, questions, preferences, and diagrams. Listen to ideas and issues from potential users and analyze the results of the previous phase.

Figure 1-3: Planning Process Diagram

Analyze what the site is capable of supporting in terms of new uses and determine what is most suitable and appropriate for its future. Create a range of alternatives that represent various levels of new development and opportunities.

Present ideas that have been generated and listen for the priorities and suggestions for changes.

Select the best opportunities and refine the land use plans and site plans to test how the alternative will work. Document the overall process including the recommendations and the possible ways of realizing these recommendations.

6 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

1.4 Vision Statement and Supporting Goals Working with the County and key stakeholders, a vision statement and supporting goals were established at the beginning of the project. The vision and goals helped to provide the framework for all planning decisions. In the beginning of the project, ideas were grouped into one of five categories that represented the range that the vision should consider. The ideas of “Think Big, Think Fun, Think Fit, Think Quiet, and Think Smart” became an organizational method for ideas brought up by the team, staff, committees, elected officials, and the general public. Think Big refers to the role that this regional park should play in the region. The park is not about supporting local and community level recreational activity, but should be about supporting regional level recreation that is not readily available in each of the local municipalities and unincorporated County areas. Think Fun refers to the need that all people have to play and explore, regardless of age. Fun is not limited to traditional playgrounds for tots and kids. Fun needs to be part of our everyday life, fun is essential for good physical, social, and mental health. Think Fit is a recognition of the role that parks need to play in providing people with exercise and general activity essential for sustaining a healthy lifestyle and a fit physical condition. These opportunities are missing in many aspects of our current built environment. Parks, especially a large regional park like Prado, can help fill in the gaps of access to physical open space, natural areas, and amenities needed to provide for the essential health goal of 30 of minutes of exercise or sustained activity per day. In order to support proper child development, this goal increases to 60 minutes per day. The concept of Think Quiet is related to the need for serenity and mindful thinking that is essential for proper social and mental health. Most of the built environment can create stress and distraction to proper daily healthy activities. Parks and open space can provide much needed relief from the daily distractions of modern-day society. This is especially true for natural resourced based parks and open space areas. Finally, the Think Smart concept recognizes the need for us to learn from our cultural and natural past. The Inland Empire has substantially changed over the years to the point where many will not recognize areas from just a few years ago due to rapid development. Thinking smart can provide needed interpretive and educational aspects for future generations to enjoy. The combination of these ideas were further organized into a Vision Statement that provided direction for the alternatives and recommendations of the plan. The Vision Statement was first suggested by County Board of Supervisors Curt Hagman and then formed by the consultant team.

This draft vision was then added to and adjusted based on survey results, TAC and CAC meeting input, and workshop exercises. The refined statement consists of:

Prado Regional Park Vision Statement

“Prado Regional Park will be a premier park for southern California and will include amenities and activities that will make it a first choice for a regional recreation destination.”

Chapter 1: Introduction | 7

Prado Regional Park Supporting Goals

1.5 Primary Guidance

Highest ranking goals first.

1.5.1 Guiding Documents

“Nature’s Way” - celebrate natural park areas by allowing visual and appropriate access, providing the opportunity for the community to learn, and increase respect for nature. “Events to Remember” - the park should expand events and programs using innovative solutions to address parking, access, flooding, and noise concerns. The public should be made more aware of the opportunities and assets of the park. “Stay a While” - programs, partners, and special events should all focus on encouraging regional visitors to stay in the park overnight or for extended day use.

“Agricultural Roots” - the park should feature the valley’s agricultural past, highlighting the social, economic, and physical conditions found today and adding an educational component to the plan. “Keep it Fun” - adults, teens, and children should be encouraged to play and be adventurous!

“Let it Rain” - the park is a flood basin behind a dam that functions to protect public safety and property. Opportunities to excavate soil to increase wetlands could help to decrease flooding in some areas. “Group Fun and Individual Adventures” - family oriented and group focused, but with a nod to individual accomplishments and learning.

“Ways to Go” - access should be improved for vehicles, transit, bikes, and hiking to reduce congestion while providing safe and convenient routes into the park.

“So Much More than a Park” - the park should include activities and facilities well beyond what other community and neighborhood parks offer in the valley. It should provide cohesive but diverse character and design elements.

The plan for Prado Regional Park considers several different existing planning policies and documents, including guidance from the Army Corps of Engineers Prado Basin Master Plan and Proposition 70 funding requirements for the east side of the park. This plan covers areas leased from the Corps and is consistent with the parallel planning efforts that are currently being completed by the Corps with its ongoing master plan process. The study also recognizes the polices and lease requirements that are established for the site in the current lease agreement. The adopted general plans from adjacent incorporated cities (Eastvale, Chino, Chino Hills, Corona, and Norco) have also been used in the development of this study. In addition to these guiding policies, representatives from key stakeholder groups, County staff, the Board of Supervisors, and the public community all provided input to help shape and form the final recommendations and plans for the park through a Technical Advisory Committee, Community Advisory Committee, community workshops and monthly progress check-in meetings.

8 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

1.5.2 Corps of Engineers Most of Prado Regional Park sits entirely on land that is leased from the United States Army Corps of Engineers. As an agency, the Corps is committed to providing public open space and outdoor recreation opportunities while sustaining natural resources. Development on the land is intended to be dependent on the adjacent natural resources and water bodies, which may include amenities like trails, campgrounds, or boat launching ramps, as an example. It also supports the idea of including auxiliary faculties such as bait shops or playgrounds, for example. Programs that donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t rely on the natural setting are discouraged. In addition, private exclusive use is not supported. In the case of Prado Regional Park, the land is also for the use of flood control as the park sits upstream of the Prado Dam, subjecting much of the park land to seasonal flooding. The basin is designed to store water up to the inundation level, which is currently at elevation 566â&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Any changes to the grading and amount of storage cannot be done without a re-allocation study and an approved Water Allocation Report. In addition, all modifications are required to offset their impacts. The recommendations within this report would need to be evaluated further to ensure that they all meet the policies and requirements established by the Corps and the Prado Basin.

Typical flooding of the basin is a consistent constraint affecting future park development

Chapter 1: Introduction | 9

Current Land-Use Classification on Corps-owned Land

Other - agriculture

Environmentally-sensitive

Other - treatment pond

Environmentally-sensitive area (Conservation/active mitigation)

Other residential/commercial/institutional

High-density recreation

Project operations

MRM - Low-density Recreation

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

Prop. 70 lands acquired by the County not under the ownership of the Corps of Engineers

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 1-4: Corps of Engineers Land Use

Text

10 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Army Corp. of Engineers Inundation Line and Elevations Above and Below Prado Dam Maximum Inundation (566' contour)

Elevation Below Inundation Line High : 609 Low : 486 Elevation Above Inundation Line High : 1625 Low : 519

Ch in o Cr ee k

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 1-5: Corps of Engineers Inundation Line

e Cr

Chapter 1: Introduction | 11

1.5.3 Proposition 70 Use Guidance In 1988, California voters approved Proposition 70 - the California Wildlife, Coastal and Park Land Conservation Act, of which $20 million was set aside for the County of San Bernardino. The County purchased a total of 366.55 acres of dairies throughout the County in the cities of Chino and Ontario, with the intent to preserve and promote the cultural agricultural heritage and environmental stewardship through education and open/recreational space opportunities. Senate Bill 1124 provided guidance on how the properties should ultimately be used. In addition, the County could

sell or exchange the current holdings as long as the retained or acquired land was located within the boundaries of the Chino Agricultural Preserve, was at least equal in acreage, and the habitat value of the land was replaced with land at least equal in habitat value. With this funding, 271 acres of land adjacent to the southeast of the existing boundaries of the park was purchased as replacement properties to expand the total park area. Within the land agreements, the northern most 10 acres of the 271 acres is to be designated specifically as agricultural use.

12 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Proposition 70 lands and requirements Active Park Conservation I

Ch in o Cr ee k

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 1-6: Prop 70 Map

Text

Existing Conditions

14 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2 Existing Conditions 2.1 History of the Site The name of the park originated form the Spanish word “prado,” translating to meadow-land or grass-land. Snow melt off the San Bernardino Mountains created waterways and rich soil which attracted Native Americans to the region. In 1839, the land was part of the Rancho El Rincon Mexican land grant. Several haciendas formed and a village called Rincon was developed, which was later renamed Prado. The town included a schoolhouse, a railroad depot, a hotel, a post office, a general store, pool hall, and garage. The town was south of the current southern boundary of the park, slightly to the east of the current dam location. Another smaller area of farmhouses and the Pioneer School appeared in the area next to Chino Creek just south of Euclid Avenue. The land, being rich with fertile soil, supported crops such as sugar beets, tomatoes, peppers, and corn. In addition, cotton and alfalfa were grown and livestock occupied most of the land. On March 3, 1938, because of increase snow-pack in the mountains and a series of rainstorms over several days, a flood devastated the town and resulted in several deaths and loss of livestock. Debris clogged water ways and the water rose 30 feet above normal at Prado. The flood affected areas west of Prado, including cities as far west as Huntington Beach. This flood prompted the need for a more regional approach to addressing the flood waters that had occurred. The Prado Dam was built by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in 1941. Much of the land was acquired by government land agents, often through eminent domain. Many areas were acquired that were in the flood basin. Several structures and agriculture areas found on these lands were left to be inundated or to simply remain in an abandoned state. Many of the other farmhouses and ranch structures were removed behind the Prado Dam. The town of Prado was officially closed in 1941 with the construction of the dam. All of Prado Regional Park, as it sits today, is leased by the County from the Army Corps of Engineers. Despite the lease for recreational purposes, the park areas still primarily function as a storage basin to prevent damaging floods from occurring again. Based on the aquifers under the basin, the area is also used to allow for the percolation of water into the ground, thereby increasing groundwater quality and quantity. The basin joins the Santa Ana River as both surface flows and subsurface flows to the west. These flows support a large underground water basin that is used by several downstream municipalities for potable water sources.

The general land cover and development patterns of the basin can be seen in the various historic aerial photos and topographic maps. The 1933 topo map is the oldest document that could be found for this area of the region. Several existing roadbeds,, including Pine Avenue and Pioneer Avenue (in the general area of Euclid Avenue), can be seen on the map, as well as McCarty Road, Cucamonga, and Johnson. These roads were likely unpaved at this time. The 1938 aerial is likely prior to the major flood event. Located in areas west of Chino Creek, the Pioneer School house can be seen, as well as several larger farmsteads, and a road network and distribution of buildings exists in the current dog training area. The historic Yorba Slaughter Families Adobe and various other ranches and farms can be seen on the aerial. Most of the area was agriculture, with grazing, row crops, orchards, and open dryland farming found throughout the area. A limited band of riparian areas along creek existed, along with more natural open space to the west. The olive grove in the southeast corner of the park does appear in this image, indicating the age of the grove may be approaching 100 years. The associated 1941 topo map shows the town of Prado more developed than in 1933. The rail line can be seen on this aerial and topo maps as well. The 1966 aerial photo shows the dam fully constructed, along with more riparian area growth along Chino Creek, as well as many more infiltration and stormwater ponds throughout the area. The Chino Institution for Women, built in 1952, is apparent next to the park. The pond at the center of the park is not yet constructed, but several basins and ponds have been created in the general area, some for water quality, some for aquifer recharge, and still others for recreation, such as duck hunting and hunting dog training. Overall development is very limited at this time. The creation of livestock holding pens and dairy ranches seems to be increasing around the park. The 1994 aerial shows development occurring west of the park, but most of the areas to the east and north are still undeveloped, although agricultural production and livestock pens are very common. Most of the park’s facilities can be seen. The extensive amount of riparian vegetation behind the dam is becoming dominant ,as well as more growth along Chino Creek. The largest change on the 2018 aerial is the extensive amount of residential development to the west of the park, the large increase in business park development to the north, and the residential development located northeast of the park. The changes between the 1994 and 2018 are substantial, with most of the easily constructible properties shown as developed.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 15

1933 USGS Topo Map

Figure 2-1: Historic Aerials and Maps

1938 Aerial

1941 USGS Topo Map

16 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

1966 Aerial

FIGURE 2-1: Historic Aerials (cont.)

1994 Aerial

2018 Aerial

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 17

2.2 Existing Overall Site Statistics Prado Regional park sits in the Chino Valley basin, covering 2,508 acres, including a 60-acre reservoir in the southwest corner of San Bernardino County. Of this acreage, 268 acres were added recently with the Proposition 70 land purchase at the southeast edge of the park. The park is bisected by Euclid Avenue and bounded by State Route 71 to the west, Pine Avenue on the north, and Hellman Avenue on the east. Visitors currently access the site from various locations, but the main entry into the improved areas of the park is on the east side Euclid Avenue. In addition, the golf course is accessed from Pine Avenue and is located west of Euclid. Both ranges and dog training facility are accessed off Euclid as well. The equestrian center utilizes the entrance off Pine Avenue and Johnson Avenue. The Proposition 70 land is accessed from Cucamonga Avenue, Hellman Avenue, and McCarty Roads.

The site is generally flat, with some areas of topographic features. Many of the steeper slopes are related to carved out areas of the flood plain. However, rolling hills and larger landform mounds do exist naturally in the area. A summary of slope represented throughout the park area indicates: Range of Slopes 0-2% (Very Flat)

% of Park 3%

3-10% (Rolling)'

29%

11-25% (Steep)

33%

26-53 (Very Steep)%

22%

100%

The amount of the total park that is dedicated to private/semi-public concessions is 38%, which includes the paint ball park, equestrian center, golf course, model airplane club, archery and shooting range, and dog training area. Another 5% is leased to agricultural leases.

18 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.3 Existing Overall Site Setting The park functions and the overall park character are set by a variety of local factors. First, the park is up against the edge of the rolling hills and mountains to the south and west, the flat plains and meadows to the north and south, and the flood plain that runs from north to south through the park. This flood plain is punctuated by mature trees and agricultural lands throughout the park and its surroundings.

The presence of large trees, agricultural remnants, and the visibility of water all combine to create a naturalistic and pastoral-like setting for the park. The primary Prado Pond is a focal point for much of the developed parkland. The riparian corridor is the central open space that appears natural, although some of these areas consist of non-native trees and disturbed agricultural areas. The mountains provide a backdrop and define the valley space, with their presence all around the park. These characteristics allow the park to be a draw to the region. If coupled with improvements and activities proposed for the park, they can result in a significant pull on the public to visit this park. Figure 2-11 shows how some of the siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s hydrologic features set the overall form of the park and provide habitat, fishing areas, ponds, and the heavy growth of trees on the site.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 19

Total Lands that Comprise Prado Regional Park (2,508 Acres) Boundary defined by parcels, and excluding public road rights-of-way

Ch in o Cr ee k

Prado Lake

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-2: Overall Site Map

e Cr

20 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.4 Existing and Surrounding Land Uses 2.4.1 Existing Land uses The entire boundary of Prado Regional Park (2,508 except for the 268 acres of land purchased by Prop. 70 funds owned by the County of San Bernardino) is leased by the County from the Corps of Engineers. Under the lease, the Corps has designated the area used mostly for Open Space and Recreation. Activities offered within the park include an 18-hole golf course, Frisbee golf, active recreation, a childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s universal playground, childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s zero-depth water play area, picnic facilities, camping, fishing, nature trails, a meeting room with an 80-person capacity, hiking trails, mountain bike trails, horseshoe pits, and multi-purpose sports fields. Other land uses that are under subleases from the County to concessionaires include: agriculture, hunting dog training, archery, gun/ skeet range, paint ball range, a model airplane airfield, and equestrian stables. The existing land uses of the site is illustrated and summarized in Figure 2-3.

2.4.2 Surrounding Land uses A substantial number of vacant parcels can be found surrounding the site. A significant amount of agriculture also exists, although it is disappearing rapidly. Some of these agricultural areas have evolved into business parks to the northwest of the park. Residential development has also created a substantial number of acres and units for housing to the north and northeast. Development to the east of the site has begun and is likely to change the land use mix substantially in these eastern areas within the cities of Eastvale and Chino. Future land use maps indicate that many of the parcels directly adjacent to the site are to be open space or other park areas. Just slightly beyond these areas, there are several mixed used, multifamily and single family land uses to the northeast and west sides of the park. To the northwest of the park, the majority of the parcels are indicated as heavy industrial with retail and commercial as a buffer between the industrial and residential areas.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 21

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas

Land Use Summary Land Use Summary 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Ch in

Land Use Classes

Golf Course Circulation, Parking, or Graded Areas Dog Training Area Agriculture Aquatics (Ponds/Open Water Bodies) Ranges (Archery and Gun) Passive Parkland Campground Model Airplane Active Parkland Equestrian Use Maintenance Paintball

Figure 2-3: Existing Land Uses

Open Space

Disturbed Natural Areas

Undisturbed Natural Areas

Elevation Above Inundation Line High : 1625 22 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Low : 519

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas 1111 1340

1433

1311

1437 1311

1340

1900

2120

1111 1437 2110

1433

2300

2110

2120

1323

1437

3100

2400

1150

1600

2110

1900

1311

1323 1600

2120

1251

Cr ee

1211

2400

1110 3100

1700 Under Construction 2600

1150 2600

1437

1850

3100

1900

1700

1246 1830

2110

3100

3000 C r Vacant 1150 a

1150 1110

ng o4000 1900 Water

1120

2400 2600

2120 1110

2400 1900

3100

1130 2600

2000 Agriculture 2110 3100 3300

1331

2600

1110

1800 Open Space and 1120 2400 2120 Recreation 1437

2110

1900 2400

1437

1600 Mixed Commercial 1122 and 1700 Residential

1210 General Office Use

1260 Educational Institutions

1150

1122 1400 Transportation, 1120 Communications, and Utilities

2120 1150 Rural Residential2110

2400

1110 3100

1300 Industrial 1110

1124

1130 Mobile Homes and Trailer Parks

1122

1270 Military Installations

1223

3300

1111 1880 3100

1110

1240 Public 2110 Facilities

2120

1437

1431

1120 Multi-Family 4100 Residential

2600

1900

2400

1100 Single Family Residential

1880

3300

1200 Commercial and Services

1433

1243

1820

1111

2110

2400

1113

1700 1600

1431 1413

1123 1431

1340

1880

1700

1437

2300

1123 1900

1820

1111

2600

1820 1232 1263

Land Use Categories (2016)

1900

2000

1111

1110

1700

1232 1900

1111

2110

2400

1437

1340

1880

1437

2110

2700

1340

1437

1124

1231

1340

2400

2600

1111

3100

1111 1820

3100

1110

2110

1110

2110 2600

3100 1111 3100

1820

1830

1436 1413 1223

1434

3100 1880

0.25

1123

2110

2400

3100

2110

1880 1262

1820

1111 2600

0.5 3100

3100

1130

1900

1111 3100

1110

Miles

Figure 2-4: Existing Surrounding Land Uses

3100

2600 2110

3100

1830 1600

1830

1437

2600

2400

3100

Elevation Above Inundation Line High : 1625

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas 1320 Heavy Industrial

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 23

Low : 519

1320 Heavy Industrial

Future Land Use (General Plan) 1320 Heavy Industrial

1320 Heavy Industrial

2000 Agriculture

1230 Other Commercial 2000 Agriculture

1320 Heavy Industrial

1820 Local Parks and Recreation

2000 Agriculture 1240 Public Facilities

1410 Transportation

1110 Single Family Residential

1500 Mixed Commercial and Industrial

1120 Multi-Family Residential

1600 Mixed Residential and Commercial

1140 Mixed Residential

1800 Open Space and Recreation

1200 General Commercial 1120 Multi-Family 1210 General Office Use Residential

1220 Retail and Commercial and Services 1221 Regional Shopping Center

1140 Mixed Residential

1140 Mixed

1240 Public Facilities

o Cr ee k

1850 Wildlife Preserves and Sanctuaries

1230 Other Commercial Residential

1880 Other Open Space and Recreation

2000 Agriculture

1850 Wildlife Preserves and Sanctuaries

1830 State and National Parks and Recreation 1850 Wildlife Preserves ek and Sanctuaries re C a

1240 Public Facilities

1300 General Industrial

1900 Urban Vacant

1310 Light Industrial

2000 Agriculture

1311

4000 Water

1850 Wildlife 1120 and LightMulti-Family ManufacturingPreserves Sanctuaries Residential

1140 Mixed Residential

2000 Agriculture

1850 Wildlife Preserves and Sanctuaries 1850 Wildlife Preserves and Sanctuaries

1800 Open Space and Recreation 1800 Open Space and Recreation

2000 Agriculture 1310 Light Industrial

1800 Open Space and Recreation

2000 Agriculture

and

g 1880 Other Open Space on am andu cRecreation

1320 Heavy Industrial 1110 Single Family Residential

1820 Local Parks 1140 Mixed Residential Recreation

1850 Wildlife Preserves and Sanctuaries 1800 Open Space and Recreation

0.25

2000 Agriculture

0.5

2000 Agriculture

Miles

Figure 2-5: Future Surrounding Land Uses

1110 Single Family Residential

1850 Wildlife Preserves and Sanctuaries

1240 Public Facilities

4000 Water 1850 Wildlife Preserves and Sanctuaries

1310 Light Industrial

24 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.4.3 Existing Concessions and Land Leases Concessionaires include: 1. Prado Equestrian Center with rentals, boarding, and guided trail rides. 2. El Prado Golf Courses that features two 18-hole golf courses. 3. Prado Olympic Shooting Park for target and sport shooting practice. 4. Oranco Bowmen Archery range. 5. Prado Recreation Dog Training Park with a dog training facility and kennel. 6. Pomona Valley Model Airplane Club for flying remote control model airplanes. All of these concessionaires have a lease with the County who, in turn, has a lease with the Army Corps of Engineers. All modifications to their land leases are required to be approved by the Corps as well. Currently, all leases are expired, and the tenants have a month-to-month holdover in their lease agreements. The intent after this master plan is adopted is that all concessionaires who wish to stay in the park are likely to negotiate new long-term leases. In the master plan’s absence, tenants are not likely to invest in their properties without the availability of a long-term lease. A series of stakeholder interviews involving six existing concessionaires and five staff interviews were conducted on September 11, 2018. Discussions included the status of the existing leases, the park operations, and the existing conditions of the park. These discussions were taken into account throughout the project when developing alternatives and the final plans. The following is a listing of key recurring themes identified in the stakeholder interviews: Infrastructure issues such as electrical service, availability of water, irrigation, and plumbing, as well as the condition of existing, aging buildings, restrooms, roads, signage, lighting, and parking Entrance and exits are perceived as dangerous – difficult to cross traffic on Euclid Perception that staffing and maintenance have been decreased by the County No maintenance on the sports fields Camping is the money maker Snack shop has not been used in five years No sidewalks, safety concern for pedestrians and bicyclists The park is in bird migration paths - big for bird watchers. Need improved marketing and advertising The lake is the jewel of the park Concessionaires passionate about their businesses and providing good service Concessionaires concerned that they don’t have long term leases Concessionaires indicated that they could and would like to provide better and expanded services Need additional amenities such as upgraded play equipment, additional trails and paths, shelters, renovated multi-purpose room, snack bars, additional camping, new restroom or showers for group camping areas, group camping, add Wi-Fi and cable

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 25

Existing concessions and land leases Equestrian center Golf course Model airplane club Archery range Shooting range Dog training - current lease area Dog training - future reduced lease area

Ch in o Cr ee k

[ Figure x Existing Concession Locations - Alex ]

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-6: Existing Concessions and Land Lease Locations

Text

26 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.5 Natural Resource Conditions Existing natural resources on the site, including biological features, hydrological features, soil features, geological features, and landform features were evaluated. The diagram below shows where the map on the right side of the page was used to develop subsequent overlays and analysis that resulted in maps that were used to determine the constraints and opportunities for park areas. The resulting maps are shown in Chapter 5. The first outer ring of maps, known as existing conditions, are the smaller circles around the larger circles. The medium sized circles represent some level of composite map, made up of the first ring of existing condition maps. The largest circles are the composites of all mapping products that can be used to determine where park development should and should not be encouraged. This resulting composite map will be used to also direct appropriate management and maintenance activities for future park operations.

2.5.1 Geologic Conditions The underlying geology as well as surface geology contribute to the physical form of the project site, as well as the creation of soils and unique landforms. No particular geologic hazards exist in the immediate area that would dramatically prevent park development. The geology is mostly responsible for the large underground aquifers that represent opportunities for groundwater storage and water quality filtration.

2.5.2 Soils Conditions Soils help to determine the fertility of an area and contribute to maintaining or evolving different landforms and slopes that may either be opportunities or constraints. The soils map shows a large amount of variability in conditions. Subsequent chapters evaluate and describe what these maps mean to development potential of parklands or habitats.

2.5.3 Slope Conditions Slopes can often determine buildable sites or park development opportunities. Lands that are too flat can often result in poor drainage and flooding. Sites with steep slopes may be difficult for the construction of parking lots, roadways, buildings, and park amenities. The overall elevation of the areas relative to Chino and Mills Creeks determines the flooding and inundation levels for the park. Generally, the sloped areas along the more commonly flooded river banks are steeper due to erosion.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 27 Qyaa Qvofa

Geology Within Park Boundary (Geologic Code and Description)

Qyfa Qvofa

Qvofa

Qvofa Ch in o C re ek

Qvofa Tpsc

Qyfa

Qyaa

Qyls? Tpsc

QTn - Late Cenozoic sedimentary rocks of Norco area (early Pleistocene to late Pliocene)-Conglomerate and conglomeratic sandstone in Norco area, nonmarine. Contains cobbles derived locally and from Transverse Ranges Qvoaa - Very old axial channel deposits (middle to early Pleistocene)-Gravel, sand, and silt; reddish-brown, well-indurated, surfaces well-dissected. Dominantly sand Qvofa - Very old alluvial fan deposits (middle to early Pleistocene)-Sandy alluvium; reddish-brown, well-indurated, fan surfaces well-dissected. Dominantly sand Qwa - Wash deposits (late Holocene)-Alluvium in active and recently active washes; Dominantly sand, unconsolidated Qyaa - Young axial channel deposits (Holocene and late Pleistocene)-Gravel, sand, and silty alluvium; gray, unconsolidated. Dominantly sand Qyfa - Young alluvial fan deposits (Holocene and late Pleistocene)-Gravel, sand, and silt, mixtures, some contain boulders; unconsolidated. Dominantly sand Qyls - Young landslide deposits (Holocene and late Pleistocene)-Rock debris and ek rubble, unsorted. All or parts of many Qyls landslides subject to renewed re C movement; primary landslide morphology typically preserved. a Tpsc - Sycamore Canyon Member of Puente Formation (early Pliocene and n g o Miocene)-Predominately sandstone and pebble conglomerate. m Qvofa a Tpy - Yorba Member of Puente Formation (Miocene)-Predominately siltstone and uc C Tp, Tpsc, sandstone. Where mostly conglomerate, subdivided as Tpyc. Includes: Tpscc, Tpy, Tpyc, Tps, Tplv

Faults

Qyls Qyls?

Qyfa

Fault Zones

Tpsc

Qyls

Qvoaa

Qyls?

Qyaa Tpsc Tpy Qyls

Tpy

Qyls Qyls

Qyls

Qyfa

Qyls?

Qyls Qyls

Qvofa

Qyls

I Qyls

0 Tpsc

Qyls 0.25 Qyls

Qyls

Qyaa

Qvofa

Tpsc

Qyls

Qyfa 0.5

Qyls

Miles Qyls

Figure 2-7: Geological Features

Qyaa

Qvoaa

Qyls Qvofa

Qyaa

QTn

28 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas GoB

Soil Types

Source: SSURGO Soil Database (2017)

CkA

CkC

HlA

Gr CkA StA Ce

Ch in

StB

CkC

SrE

GaC

CkC

SrE

CkD

CkA

CkC

CkD

StB

ek r e Hr

CkA

SrF Prado Lake

CkC SrE

CkD

SrE

FoF

SrF

CkA

Ce Gr

CkC Cb

Cb Go

RmC

CkC

RaC3

RaA

CkC CkD

I 0

CkC

FoF FoF SrF

0.25

0.5 Miles FoF

Figure 2-8: Soil Features

RmC

CkC

RmD

Hr RaC3

Gs GtC

SrE

RmC GaC

HlA

RmC RmE2

GaC FoF

ReC2

CnD

CkD

SrE

HcC RaB2

RaB3

StA

PaA

CnD

SrF

CkC

CkA

RaB3

RaD3

HcC

HaC DaD2

GoB DrA

RaB3

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 29

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas

Percent Slope 0 - 2% 2 - 5% 5 - 10% 10 - 15% > 15%

Ch in o Cr ee k

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-9: Landform

30 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.5.4 Sensitive Species This data represents detailed vegetation cover which is grouped into levels of habitat sensitivity ranging from high to no known sensitivity. Similar to many of the other natural resources and their sensitivity towards development, habitat sensitivity follows the water corridors that run across the site, including both Cucamonga and Chino Creek and other feeder creeks. Most of the Proposition 70 land, as well and the golf course, ranges, and developed part of the park do not contain known sensitive habitat. Historically, the area has been heavily grazed, farmed, and cultivated, resulting in many areas that do not have any native plant species or habitats. Additional analysis in Chapter 5 shows how these sensitive areas have been mapped, composited, and used to determine appropriate land uses and opportunities for habitat restoration and enhancements.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 31

Sensitive Species Habitat with high suitability for sensitive species: Cactus wren, Least Bell's vireo, White-tailed kite, and Yellow-billed cuckoo

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-10: Sensitive Species

Text

32 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.5.5 Hydric Condition This map represents the most recent coverage of hydric conditions from the National Wetlands Inventory, which is the mapping and classification standard for wetland data across the United States. The hydric condition considers the soil types and vegetation related to flooding potential. Approximately 50 percent of the site is either moderately or slightly limited for park development; whereas, the remainder of the site has not been identified as wetland potential, thereby making it potentially reasonable for development based on the hydric condition alone.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 33

Wetland Type Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Freshwater Pond Lake and Riverine Source: National Wetlands Inventory (Oct. 2017)

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-11: Hydrologic Conditions

Text

34 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.5.6 FEMA Flood Levels The majority of the park boundaries fall within a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) according to FEMA. SFHAs are defined as the area that will be inundated by the flood event having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The one percent annual chance flood is also referred to as the base flood or 100-year flood. Flooding is a dramatic constraint for the park and should be considered as its most serious challenge. However, the flooding is due mostly to slow rising waters from behind Prado Dam and not based just on rain induced river swelling and the associated erosive forces of moving water that can result in serious levels of landform, siltation, erosion, and long term changes in habitats.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 35

FEMA 100-Year Flood Zone -1: Inside Flood Zone 1: Outside Flood Zone

Ch in o Cr ee k

Prado Lake

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-12: FEMA 100-Year Flood Zone

e Cr

36 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.5.7 Inundation Levels The Corps of Engineers has established elevation 566â&#x20AC;&#x2122; as the current inundation level for the Prado Basin. At this level, the entire boundary of the park, including the Prop. 70 land, would be covered in water except for one area on a hill next to the reservoir and some higher elevations in the southeast corner of the site. This contour line reaches well beyond the boundaries of the park as indicated in the map. This makes development difficult in the park. There are significant elevation changes throughout the park, making some areas more susceptible than others when it comes to flooding, but in an extreme situation, almost the entire landmass of park could potentially be covered in water.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 37

Prado Dam Inundation Level (566' Elevation)

Prado Dam Inundation Level Analysis Score -1: Below Inundation Level 1: Above Inundation Level

Ch in o Cr ee k

Prado Lake

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-13: Inundation Levels

e Cr

38 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.5.8 Slope Analysis Because the area has historically served as an alluvial fan, the majority of the slopes are in the range of 0-2 percent. Where there are elevation changes, the slopes are moderate and fall within 2-15 percent. There are only a few areas that are over 15 percent. The flatter slopes are ideal for larger recreational fields, camping areas or large buildings that require larger areas of relatively flat space, whereas some recreational activities, such as adventure parks or skills courses, can benefit from the natural sloping terrain.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 39

Slope Analysis Score -1: Flat Slopes (0-2%), more Susceptible to Inundation

Ch in o Cr ee k

Prado Lake

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-14: Slope Analysis

e Cr

40 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.5.9 Expansive Soils - Soil Suitability There are approximately 21 different soil types within the area and even less within the park boundaries. In general, these soils can be classified as either clay loam, sandy loam, or gravelly loam. Of these different types of soils, clay typically has the most expansive characteristics and is not ideal for the development of new structures without costly solutions to reduce their shrink and swell properties. The following map identifies where the expansive soils are generally located within the park boundary and where high investment structures should be avoided when possible

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 41

Clay Soils with High Shrink-Swell Potential Analysis Score: -1

Ch in o Cr ee k

Prado Lake

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-15: Expansive Soils - Soil Suitability

e Cr

42 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.5.10 Erodible Soils Erodible soils can be found throughout the site. The erodibility of a soil factors in the slope percentage and soil type. Most soils within the park boundaries fall within 0-15 percent slopes and there are just two soil types that are severely eroded. Fine sandy loam makes up areas around the natural watershed and low points of the site. Clay loam with slopes between 2-15 percent are found around the reservoir, at the developed areas of the park and dog training area while silt loam makes up the majority of areas at the ranges. The east side of the site consists of sandy loam. The erodibility of the site is mapped on the following pages and ranges from high, medium, to low potential

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 43

Soil Erodibility Potential -2: High Potential -1: Moderate Potential 0: Low Potential

Ch in o Cr ee k

Prado Lake

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-16: Erodible Soils

e Cr

44 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.5.11 Existing Land Cover The existing site land use of the park is defined as open space and recreation. Most of the site is disturbed with undisturbed natural areas and open space adjacent to the water corridor that runs through the site at the low points. The golf course takes up a significant area of land in the northwest corner of the site. There are larger areas of agriculture near the dog training area at the southwest corner of the site, along with adjacent water bodies. The developed part of the park is concentrated around the reservoir, including passive park land, active park land, equestrian use, and campground. The model airplane area is isolated and surrounded by open space. Lastly, the ranges, including gun and archery, are on the west side of the park.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 45

Land Cover Classes Active Agriculture Turfed Areas Disturbed Uplands Disturbed Lowlands Undisturbed Lowlands Highly Disturbed, Developed, Graded, or Paved Water Bodies Ch in o Cr ee k

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-17: Existing Land Cover

e Cr

46 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.5.12 Existing Vegetation Condition The vegetation on site ranges from native to non-native, with the majority of the area being nonnative cover including urban, recreation, non-native grass, and eucalyptus. Agricultural is located mostly on the perimeter of the site. Most riparian vegetation, mixed grassland/shrubs, or annual grasslands can be found associated with and adjacent to the watershed and creeks running through the site.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 47

Vegetation Classes Agriculture/Cropland Annual Grassland Aquatic/Lacustrine/Riverine Coastal Sage Scrub / Non-Native Weeds Coastal Scrub Eucalyptus Mixed Grassland / Shrub Non-Native Grasses / Weeds Ch

Recreation

in o

Riparian

Cr ee k

Urban C

Prado Lake

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-18: Existing Vegetation Condition

e Cr

48 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.6 Man-Made Resource Conditions In addition to natural resources, all of the man-made resource conditions were reviewed and documented. These included motorized and non-motorized circulation and features, buildings, utilities, easements and right-of-ways, and cultural or historic features.

2.6.1 Existing Buildings All existing buildings on site are typically associated with the various concessioner developments or support buildings or maintenance. The golf course includes an existing clubhouse and maintenance building. The dog training facility has structures for boarding dogs and a small office on the site. A series of stables for boarding horses is within the equestrian facility. Adjacent to the equestrian facility is where the County has the maintenance yard, including buildings for maintaining the main areas of the park. All existing structures on site are in fair condition because of the ages of some of the buildings, and could use significant upgrades. The multi-purpose room on site includes a fullyequipped kitchen and restrooms with a capacity of 80 people, and is frequently rented for events. The paint ball facility utilizes modular buildings for their offices on the Proposition 70 land. A few historic foundations can be found in the lower southwest corner of the site.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 49

Existing buildings

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-19: Existing Buildings

Text

50 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.6.2 Existing Utilities The existing utilities are limited within the site and are concentrated on the north side. There is a large electrical transmission line running from west to east that cuts across the existing golf course. Smaller electrical lines are also on the northern side of the site running both east and west around the main park development and north to south across the panhandle of the park boundary. The existing lake is fed from a water line from the sanitary sewer treatment facility that is to the north of the park and runs south through the park. This line is the water supply for the lake and the lake itself is considered part of the existing sanitary sewer and water infrastructure. Last, there are several oil and gas wells that are surrounding the site and one plugged well that is on the site near the gun range. Sanitary Sewer and Water The areas containing the current campground, golf course, and park facilities have existing sewer and water systems. These systems connect into the utility mains of the surrounding roads. For the areas with existing utility systems, the park’s planned development should be able to utilize the existing mains to address the proposed capacity needs. The western area of the park proximate to Chino Corona Road, River Road, and Hellman Avenue is largely undeveloped land with no major utilities adjacent. Utility access can be provided for these areas with the construction of new additional infrastructure.

Private developments in the surrounding areas will upgrade existing or install new utility mains. An 8-inch water line is planned for The Preserve residential development in Chino Corona Road and Hellman Avenue. The Preserve will also include a sewer line that will tie into the sewer lift station at the northern border of the current park’s facilities. The utilities for The Preserve are near the portions of the park close to Chino Corona Road and Hellman Avenue. Connections to The Preserve’s utilities may be used to provide for the increased demand associated with park expansion and enhancement. Stormwater Prado Regional Park is centrally located in the Santa Ana River Watershed. Two natural streams pass through the park before flowing into the Santa Ana River. San Antonio Channel enters the park area from the northwest and Cucamonga Channel enters the park from the northeast. Within the park, stormwater flows as surface water and generally drains to the southwest toward the Prado Reservoir and dam. This water flows over permeable surfaces such as open channels however, some flow conveyed through impermeable roadways and parking lots and into a limited number of culverts that direct water into Prado Lake. The lake receives runoff from three localized drainages originating in the Chino Preserve area and the City of Ontario is used for retention and the spillway at the bottom is used to control the release of water. In addition to natural drainage, the park receives water from the City of Chino and the City of Eastvale. Coordination with these cities is necessary to explore regional approaches to stormwater management and to ensure future system capacity. Existing facilities The sewer lift station is located along Johnson Avenue near the equestrian center. This lift station is a transfer point for the sewer system flows generated by the surrounding areas, including the park facilities. The lift station transports the sewer flows from these systems to the Inland Empire Utilities Agency’s (IEUA) regional facilities. The existing IEUA - Regional Water Recycling Plant No. 2 is in the northwest area of Prado Regional Park. This facility is part of a system of facilities operated by the IEUA that serve the Cities of Chino, Chino Hills, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, and Upland. This facility treats the biosolids flow streams from the Carbon Canyon Water Recycling Facility.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 51

Utilities Electric Transmission 500 kV 220 kV 66 kV Sewage / Stormwater 36-inch Santa Ana Regional Interceptor Line

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-20: Existing Utilities

Text

52 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.6.3 Easements and Rights-of-Way Existing easements on the site include utility, roadway, and wildlife corridor crossings. The County has an arranged agreement with the Corps and Orange County for the use of their land as a dirt overflow parking lot. An easement in this area allows San Bernardino County access to this parking lot. Caltrans has provided an easement for the tunnel under SR71 that is functioning as a wildlife connection and for public use to connect Chino State Park with Prado Regional Park. All public roadways such as Pine, Pomona, Rincon, Euclid, Johnson, Cucamonga, McCarty, and Hellman include right-of way setback. In addition, McCarty Road, as it crosses Mill Creek, includes a ROW anticipating further expansion into the park. Some of the utility easements on the site include a major water trunk line that discharges into the pond from the treatment plant nearby and runs further south into the site.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 53

Easements and Rights-of-Way Easement Right-of-way

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-21: Easements and Rights-of-Way

Text

54 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.6.4 Cultural Resources Waterways typically have a large number of cultural resources around the areas because of the need of water for survival for all kinds of species. Access to water is critical and typically this is where developments were historically focused. This is true in the case of Prado Regional Park. Within the park, both historic and prehistoric cultural resources have been identified. The map indicates a 100-meter square area as a generalized area so that these resources are protected.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 55

Cultural Resources* Historic Prehistoric

* Generalized to protect cultural resource. Resources are represented by 100 meter squares, the actual site can be located anywhere inside this area.

1 1

Cr ee

1 1

1 1 1 1

1 1

I 0

1 1

0.225

0.45 Miles

Figure 2-22: General Location of Cultural or Historic Features

g on

56 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.6.5 Existing Roads and Parking Vehicular access to Prado Regional Park is provided by a network of regional and local roadways. Park access driveways are provided along State Route 83 (SR-83, Euclid Avenue), Pine Avenue, and Pomona Rincon Road. Johnson Avenue also offers park access near the equestrian center. SR-71, which has a partial cloverleaf interchange with Euclid Avenue, provides regional access to the area. Other existing roadways offer the potential for new access points. Those roadways include Chino Corona Avenue, Cucamonga Avenue, Hellman Avenue, and McCarty Road. Existing roads and parking area within the park are limited to areas of development within the park and are focused around the main concession areas at the ranges, golf course, and equestrian center. The main road running through the park is asphalt and feeds to parking lots spread out across the site. This road does not have a curb and gutter or sidewalks associated with it. There is also a large decomposed granite parking lot outside of the park boundary across from the camping area. This parking lot is owned by the County of Orange and leased by San Bernardino County for larger events.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 57

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas

Paved Roads and Parking Pavement / Roads

Ch in o Cr ee k

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-23: Existing Roads and Parking

58 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

2.6.6 Existing Park Entries The main entry into the park is just off Euclid Avenue on the east side of the road. All visitors to the park are greeted by an overhead sign and gate entry where an entry fee is collected. Euclid is an extremely busy road with high speed traffic coming off the freeway, making it difficult to merge into oncoming traffic as visitors exit the park in both the north and south direction from the main park, shooting ranges, and dog park. The equestrian center utilizes the entrance off Pine Avenue and Johnson Avenue. Pine Avenues sees a fair amount of traffic because of commuters traveling to Norco or Eastvale. There is no gate fee for the equestrian center in this location or for the golf course off Pine Avenue to the east of Euclid. The Proposition 70 land is accessed off Cucamonga Avenue, Hellman Avenue, and McCarty Roads. The only existing improvement on this land is a paint ball facility, which is accessed off McCarty. The existing sub-regional road network informs the best locations for future gates and points out that the concentrated road network in the area tends to concentrate traffic on certain arterials. If the park plans substantially increase trips, then some improvements will need to be made to the local arterial roads. Pine Avenue is already proposed for improvements and Euclid Avenue has on the books, some increased number of lanes. Johnson, Cucamonga, Hellman Avenue and McCarty are all likely to need some form of improvements .

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions | 59

Park Entrances Existing Entrances

! ( ! (

! (

o Cr ee k

! ( C

Primary Secondary

Prado Lake

! (

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 2-24: Existing Park Entries

Text

60 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Figure 2-25: Sub-regional Roadway Network

Community and Stakeholder Engagement

62 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

3 Community and Stakeholder Engagement

Community engagement played a major role throughout the master planning process. This regional park, with its large scale and geographic reach, needed to have a multipronged approach to gather community and stakeholder feedback. The County engaged with the community through a series of workshops, stakeholder meetings, and two project surveys. Surveys and the dissemination of project products were offered on-line as well. To further assist in developing and gathering comprehensive feedback, the planning process included the creation of a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and a Community Advisory Committee (CAC). The TAC and CAC played a major role in providing feedback for the development of community engagement strategies and many other processes for the development of the master plan.

Project logo and branding

A variety of outreach materials were created to maximize engagement. All outreach materials were designed and made available in both paper and digital versions, as well as in English and Spanish, because of the County’s multigenerational and diverse population. Spanishspeaking team members were present at all workshops.

Branding and Announcements To generate public interest and to create a unique identity, the team branded the project with a logo designed specifically for this project with the colors found in the County’s logo and website. Branding this project assisted with immediate recognition whenever outreach materials, such as flyer’s and surveys, were posted on-line. The team coordinated with County staff to create fact sheets and flyer’s for the planned workshops and surveys. The County’s on-line

presence and comprehensive email ListServe were utilized to announce community workshops and encourage survey participation. Furthermore, the project’s stakeholder team was also tasked to assist in disseminating workshop and survey information to their network of contacts.

3.1 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Input The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was composed of individuals whose day-to-day involvement with Prado Regional Park would provide valuable technical feedback to the planning process. The following members were invited to participate: Cities of Chino and Chino Hills County of San Bernardino Regional Parks County of San Bernardino Public Works County of San Bernardino Land Use Services U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers County of San Bernardino Economic Development Office of Fourth District Supervisor Curt Hagman Three meetings were scheduled at key milestones throughout the project’s planning process. The first meeting focused on a general overview of the vision, goals, and input on how and where to conduct the community workshops. Additional input included the development of park programming options that would be presented at the first workshop, as well as their thoughts on the park’s opportunities and challenges. The second meeting provided a summary of the results from the first community workshop, a deeper discussion on circulation and access to

the park, and additional discussions on the opportunities and constraints. The final TAC meeting focused on reviewing the results from the second community workshop and how those results would contribute to a final set of revised challenges and possible solutions. The TAC had an opportunity to provide feedback that would ultimately influence the development of the final conceptual site plan for the park.

3.2 Community Advisory Committee (CAC) Input The Community Advisory Committee (CAC) was also composed of individuals with local knowledge and experience with Prado Regional Park. The CAC members were invited to participate in the project’s planning process by attending three scheduled CAC meetings and two community workshops. The following is a condensed list of some of the CAC members that participated.

City of Chino Planning Dept.

City of Chino Parks and Recreation Dept.

City of Chino Hills Planning Dept.

City of Chino Hills Parks and Recreation Dept.

City of Eastvale Planning Dept.

City of Eastvale Parks and Recreation Dept.

City of Norco Planning Dept.

City of Norco Parks and Recreation Dept.

City of Corona Planning Dept.

City of Corona Parks and Recreation Dept.

City of Ontario Planning Dept.

City of Ontario Parks and Recreation Dept.

Endangered Habitats League

Chapter 3: Community and Stakeholder Engagement | 63

Similarly to the TAC, three meetings were scheduled at key milestones throughout the project’s planning process. The first meeting focused on a general overview of the vision and goals, and the development of park programming options that would be presented at the first workshop. The team also presented a series of analyses maps based on the park’s existing conditions, providing the CAC an opportunity to comment on the opportunities and challenges in the park. The second meeting provided a summary of the results from the first community workshop and allowed for a deeper discussion on circulation and access to the park. The CAC also had an opportunity to provide feedback on the content and activities for the second community workshop. The final CAC meeting focused on reviewing the results from the second community workshop and how those results would contribute to a final set of revised challenges and possible solutions. The CAC had an opportunity to provide feedback that would ultimately influence the development of the final conceptual site plan for the park.

3.3 Community Workshops Two community workshops were scheduled at the two key milestones in the project’s planning process to communicate goals, present mapping analyses, receive general feedback, and prioritize preliminary recommendations. Both workshops were designed as interactive workshops that included presentations, discussions, surveys, and table-top exercises. The following section describes the two workshops in more detail.

3.3.1 Workshop #1: Chino Hills Community Center The first workshop took place on Wednesday, January 30, 2019 at the Chino Hills Community Center. The focus of the first workshop was to introduce the project, present the goals, invite community members to participate in the project survey, provide general map comments, and engage in a sticker-voting exercise. Support exhibits included a “Vision and Goals” board, a “Where do you live” map, a “Where do you play” map, and several analyses maps that depicted opportunities and challenges based on existing environmental, engineering, and facility conditions. The workshop room was organized into various stations that contained the exhibits previously mentioned. Attendees were able to review the materials, ask questions, and provide comments as they saw fit. The sticker-voting exercise and project survey were the primary activities that evening. The sticker exercise was divided up by the following park program elements categories:

Flyer’s created for Workshop #1

Think Big i.e. community/regional events, Tournaments, sporting events Think Fun i.e. innovative play areas, aquatic play, skills courses Think Fit i.e. outdoor exercise, field sports, linear recreation Think Quiet i.e. camping, social venues, demonstration gardens Think Smart i.e. nature center, nature programs, agricultural programs

64 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Workshop 1 Photos

Chapter 3: Community and Stakeholder Engagement | 65

66 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

3.3.2 Workshop #1 Summary Approximately 110 community members made their voices heard that evening. The information gathered at this workshop would provide valuable direction for the development of four conceptual layouts that would be presented to stakeholders and the community at the second community workshop. The following section provides a summary of the comments the community shared

Draft Vision Statement The community was asked to review the draft vision statement and to place a star next to the draft supporting goals they wanted to prioritize. “Prado Regional Park will be a premier park for Southern California and will include amenities and activities that will make it a first choice for a regional recreation destination.” 1) “Events to Remember” - the park should expand events and programs using innovative solutions to address parking, access, flooding, and noise concerns. The public should be made more aware of the opportunities and assets of the park. 14 Stars 2) “Group Fun and Individual Adventures” – family oriented and group focused, but with a nod to individual accomplishments and learning. 5 Stars 3) “So Much More than a Park” - the park should include activities and facilities well beyond what other community and neighborhood parks offer in the valley. It should provide cohesive but diverse character and design elements. 3 Stars

4) “Agricultural Roots to Grow From” - the park should feature the valley’s agricultural past, highlighting the contribution to social, economic, and physical conditions found today and adding an educational component to the plan. 10 Stars 5) “Nature’s Way” - celebrate natural park areas by allowing visual and appropriate access, providing the opportunity for the community to learn and increase respect for nature. 15 Stars 6) “Let it Rain” - the park is a flood basin behind a dam that functions to protect public safety and property. Opportunities to excavate soil to increase wetlands could help to decrease flooding in some areas. 6 Stars 7) “Ways to Go” - access should be improved for vehicles, transit, bikes, and hiking to reduce congestion while providing safe and convenient routes into the park. 4 Stars 8) “Stay a While” - Programs, partners, and special events should all focus on encouraging regional visitors to stay in the park overnight or for extended day use.

“What Do You Like and Dislike?” Exhibit Workshop attendees had the opportunity to provide written comments on a large aerial map of the park. They were asked what they like and don’t like about Prado Regional Park. The following comments were communicated that evening: Preserve open spaces Trails not with cars Preserve horse trails Music or concerts in the park Not being able to book a site for large events more than a year out Would like to have swimming at the lake Dislike poor fish stockings during winter (trout) Connecting with nature Better marked areas Better entrance Lower price of entry for fishing Dislike fishing hours. Lack of night fishing for winter or summer

Community/Regional Events

Sporting Events

Like the gun range Car access for fishing More group parking and electrical updates Like that I and 260+ members of the local club and others from outside areas have the best flying site in Southern California

Park Amenities and Programs Exhibits The Park Amenities and Programs exhibits were used in conjunction with the first project survey. These table-top exhibits were organized into the categories previously mentioned, which allowed workshop attendees to see visual examples of the potential amenities and programs that can be included in the master plan. People had the opportunity to add stickers and comments to the exhibits to show their support or opposition. The following images depict the number of “yes” or “no” sticker comments each category received. Tournaments

International Competitions

YES: 1

NO: 11

YES: 4

NO: 0

YES: 2

NO: 0

YES: 4

NO: 0

YES: 2

NO: 9

YES: 7

NO: 0

YES: 0

NO: 0

YES: 2

NO: 2

YES: 3

NO: 6

YES: 2

NO: 2

YES: 3

NO: 0

YES: 0

NO: 0

11 Stars 9) “Keep it Fun” - Adults, teens, and children should be encouraged to play and be adventurous! 10 Stars

THINK BIG: Entertainment, Sporting Events, Tournaments, and Olympics “Think Big” Workshop 1 tally

Chapter 3: Community and Stakeholder Engagement | 67

Skills Courses

YES: 8

NO: 0

Innovative Play Areas

Aquatic Play

Rolling Adventure

Nature Center

Nature Programs

Agricultural Origins

YES: 8

NO: 0

YES: 8

NO: 6

YES: 5

NO: 2

YES: 8

NO: 0

YES: 12

NO: 0

YES: 4

NO: 0

YES: 10

NO: 0

YES: 2

NO: 0

YES: 8

NO: 0

YES: 1

NO: 1

YES: 11

NO: 0

YES: 11

NO: 0

YES: 11

NO: 0

YES: 13

NO: 0

YES: 2

NO: 0

YES: 8

NO: 1

YES: 2

NO: 2

YES: 6

NO: 0

YES: 7

NO: 0

YES: 8

NO: 0

THINK FUN: Adventure Activities, Innovative Playgrounds, & Aquatic Play “Think Fun” Workshop 1 tally

THINK SMART: Nature Center, Nature Programs, and Agricultural Origins “Think Smart” Workshop 1 tally

Outdoor Exercise

Field Sports

Court Sports

Camping

Linear Recreation

YES: 4

NO: 0

YES: 2

NO: 0

YES: 3

NO:

YES: 7

NO: 0

YES: 10

YES: 4

NO: 0

YES: 1

NO: 0

YES: 3

NO: 0

YES: 8

NO: 0

YES: 6

YES: 3

NO: 0

YES: 7

NO: 1

YES: 3

NO: 0

YES: 8

NO: 0

YES: 0

THINK FIT: Outdoor Exercise, Field Sports, Court Sports, and Pool Activities “Think Fit” Workshop 1 tally

NO: 0

Social Venues

Demonstration Gardens

Retail

YES: 6

NO: 0

YES: 5

NO:

YES: 3

NO: 2

NO: 0

YES: 2

NO: 0

YES: 4

NO: 0

YES: 3

NO: 1

NO: 2

YES: 4

NO: 1

YES: 12

YES: 4

NO: 1

NO: 0

THINK QUIET: Camping, Social Venues, Demonstration Gardens, and Retail “Think Quiet” Workshop 1 tally

68 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

3.3.3 Workshop #2: Chaffey College The second workshop took place on Saturday, April 6, 2019 at the Chaffey College Chino Campus. The workshop was structured similarly to the first workshop in that it included a presentation followed by a breakout session with table-top exercises that accompanied a questionnaire. The main activity for this workshop asked attendees to review four conceptual park layouts and to both comment and vote on the park elements they preferred. An “Alternatives Questionnaire” was used as the voting tool for this activity. Workshop attendees had an opportunity to visit each station and review the elements included for that activity.

Flyer’s created for Workshop #2

Support exhibits included a revised series of analyses maps depicting opportunities and challenges, as well as a historical imagery exhibit that depicted the park’s evolution. Over 60 community members and stakeholders attended this workshop, and each had the opportunity to win raffle prizes for having participated in the “Alternatives Questionnaire.” The information gathered was used to help prioritize park program elements and their locations relative to the park’s boundaries and helped to later inform the preferred alternative. The results were also used for the final TAC and CAC meeting to provide direction for the development of one preferred alternative for the master plan.

Workshop 2 Photos

Chapter 3: Community and Stakeholder Engagement | 69

70 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

3.4 Questionnaires (Surveys) Two main questionnaires (surveys) were developed to gather feedback needed for understanding existing park use, the general state of perception of the park, what kinds of park amenities existing and future park users would like to see, and ultimately prioritizing those amenities and facilities for a preferred concept.

3.4.1 User Survey The first questionnaire was a “User Survey” that included 11 questions and asked people to vote on how important park amenities and facilities were to them in the following categories:

Think Big i.e. Community/regional events, tournaments, sporting events

Think Fun i.e. Innovative play areas, aquatic play, skills courses

Think Fit i.e. Outdoor exercise, field sports, linear recreation

Think Quiet i.e. Camping, social venues, demonstration gardens

Think Smart i.e. Nature center, nature programs, agricultural programs

These categories and their potential amenities were depicted on large-scale table exhibits with photos. A total of 723 people completed the User Survey between those that attended the workshop and those that completed the on-line version of the survey. These results were presented at the second TAC and CAC meeting and helped develop the four alternatives presented at the second community workshop.

3.4.2 Alternatives Survey The second questionnaire was an “Alternatives Survey,” which allowed participants to vote on the type and geographic location of proposed park amenities within four alternative layouts. The survey was developed for the second workshop and was also made available digitally. Ninety people completed this survey and these results were used to influence the direction of one preferred layout concept that would eventually become the master plan. The TAC and CAC also had the opportunity to review these survey results at the third meeting.

Chapter 3: Community and Stakeholder Engagement | 71

Think Big: What type of site amenities are important to you?

Priority Level Not Important

Very Important

Think Fun: Which of the following adventure-based activities are a priority to you?

Regional events such as major concerts, Battle of the Ring, or equestrian shows

Skills courses such as ropes course, climbing wall, or zip Line

Community events such as local concerts, car shows, or movie nights

Innovative play areas such adventure playgrounds or themed playgrounds

Sporting events such as Spartan Races or Cycle Cross

Aquatic play such as water slides, lazy river, or spray grounds

Olympic venues such as archery and shooting ranges

Aquatic adventure such as kayaking, paddle boats, or fishing

Field tournaments such as soccer or baseball

Rolling adventure such as skate or bike skills park

Court tournaments such as sand volleyball, tennis, or basketball

Equestrian activities such as horseback riding, training, or dressage “Think Fun” User Survey results

Multi-purpose event space such as banquet halls or restaurants “Think Big” User Survey results

Priority Level Not Important

Very Important

72 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Think Fit: Which of the following fitness-based activities are a priority to you? Outdoor exercise equipment

Field sports such as soccer, baseball, softball, or frisbee golf Court sports such as tennis, pickleball, basketball, or volleyball

Priority Level Not Important

Very Important

Think Quiet: Which of the following passive activities are a priority to you? Camping such as RV, tent, yurt, cabin, or group campgrounds

Social venues such as picnic areas or shaded gathering spaces

Nature exploration such as bird watching, nature walks, or lookouts

Linear recreation as such walking paths, bike paths, or hiking trails Pool activities such as lap swim, water aerobics, or swim lessons Canine activities such as dog training facility or dog park

“Think Fit” User Survey results

Demonstration gardens such as native plant gardens or water-wise gardens

Retail spaces such as general store, bait shop, camp store, or food trucks “Think Quiet” User Survey results

Priority Level Not Important

Very Important

Chapter 3: Community and Stakeholder Engagement | 73

Think Smart: Which of the following educational activities are a priority to you?

Priority Level Not Important

Very Important

Which of the following improvements are a priority to you?

State-of-the-Art Nature Center

Increased parking

Nature programs for K-12, college students, or environmental groups

Lighting for evening use

Agricultural activities such as corn mazes, community gardens, farmers’ market, or petting zoo

Additional restrooms

“Think Smart” User Survey results

Wayfinding signage

Improved shade such as shelters or trees

Drinking fountains

Continuous sidewalks through the park

“General Park Improvements” User Survey results

Priority Level Not Important

Very Important

74 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

3.4.3 User Survey Results The surveys that were completed at the workshops and on-line, were compiled with a numeric system that allowed the results to be summarized and sorted by the highest rated priority elements. The system weighed scores for each element with a higher numeric value for people’s first and second priorities, and weighed scores with a slightly reduced value for their fourth and fifth priorities. The tables in this section summarize the results according to the weighted and unweighted priority elements.

Question Asked: “ Answer the following question by

selecting the number that shows how important this element is to you. A higher number means this element is more important to you. “

Table 3-1: User Survey Results: Sorted By Category with Weighted Scores Think Big: Question

4 x2 60 45 46 49 51 34 43

3 x1 93 130 106 98 97 108 105

2 x-1 37 46 36 49 32 63 57

1 x-2 127 123 147 159 197 162 175

Weighted Score

Community events such as local concerts, car shows, or movie nights Olympic venues such as archery and shooting ranges Multi-purpose event space such as banquet halls or restaurants Court tournaments such as sand volleyball, tennis, pickleball, or basketball Regional events such as major concerts, Battle of the Ring, or equestrian shows Field tournaments such as soccer or baseball Sporting events such as Spartan Races or Cycle Cross

5 x3 154 118 119 86 94 83 63

Think Fun: Question Aquatic adventure such as kayaking, paddle boats, or fishing Innovative play areas such as adventure playgrounds or themed playgrounds Skills courses such as ropes course, climbing wall, or zip Line Aquatic play such as water slides, wave pool, lazy river, or spray grounds Equestrian activities such as horseback riding, event training, or dressage Rolling adventure such as skate parks or bike skills park

5 230 178 151 199 109 80

4 64 64 62 40 48 37

3 92 93 115 75 116 113

2 26 36 39 36 58 55

1 65 95 98 114 116 149

Weighted Score 754 529 457 488 249 74

Think Fit: Question Linear recreation such as walking paths, bike paths, or hiking trails Outdoor exercise equipment Pool activities such as lap swim, water aerobics, or swim lessons Canine activities such as dog training facility or dog park Court sports such as tennis, pickleball, basketball, tennis, or sand volleyball Field sports such as soccer, baseball, softball, or frisbee golf

5 320 114 141 119 88 85

4 58 52 51 44 53 52

3 57 114 98 114 110 113

2 10 52 48 49 51 57

1 30 112 104 114 136 132

Weighted Score 1063 284 367 282 157 151

Think Quiet: Question Nature exploration such as bird watching, nature walks, or lookouts Social venues such as picnic areas or shaded gathering spaces Camping such as RV, tent, yurt, cabin, or group campgrounds Demonstration gardens such as native plant gardens or water-wise gardens Retail spaces such as general store, bait shop, camp store, or food trucks

5 246 196 207 164 106

4 61 93 62 64 62

3 85 97 94 108 115

2 34 34 35 52 56

1 46 50 69 66 117

Weighted Score 819 737 666 544 267

Think Smart: Question Nature programs for K-12, college students, or environmental groups State-of-the-Art Nature Center Agricultural activities such as corn mazes, community gardens, or farmers’ market

5 220 197 86

4 51 55 70

3 101 111 85

2 40 35 33

1 55 63 89

Weighted Score 713 651 272

384 282 225 87 55 38 -27

Chapter 3: Community and Stakeholder Engagement | 75

Table 3-2: User Survey Results: Sorted by Top Weighted Scores Program Element

Weighted Score

Linear recreation such as walking paths, bike paths, or hiking trails

320

1063

Nature exploration such as bird watching, nature walks, or lookouts

246

819

Aquatic adventure such as kayaking, paddle boats, or fishing

230

754

Social venues such as picnic areas or shaded gathering spaces

196

737

Nature programs for K-12, college students, or environmental groups

220

713

Camping such as RV, tent, yurt, cabin, or group campgrounds

207

666

State-of-the-Art Nature Center

197

651

Demonstration gardens such as native plant gardens or water-wise gardens

164

544

Innovative play areas such as adventure playgrounds or themed playgrounds

178

529

Aquatic play such as water slides, wave pool, lazy river, or spray grounds

199

488

Skills courses such as ropes course, climbing wall, or zip Line

151

457

Community events such as local concerts, car shows, or movie nights

154

384

Pool activities such as lap swim, water aerobics, or swim lessons

141

367

Outdoor exercise equipment

114

284

Olympic venues such as archery and shooting ranges

118

282

Canine activities such as dog training facility or dog park

119

282

Agricultural activities such as corn mazes or farmersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; market

272

Retail spaces such as general store, bait shop, camp store, or food trucks

106

267

Equestrian activities such as horseback riding, event training, or dressage

109

249

Multi-purpose event space such as banquet halls or restaurants

119

225

Court sports such as tennis, pickleball, basketball, tennis, or sand volleyball

157

Field sports such as soccer, baseball, softball, or frisbee golf

151

Court tournaments such as sand volleyball, tennis, pickleball, or basketball

Rolling adventure such as skate parks or bike skills park

Regional events such as major concerts, Battle of the Ring, or equestrian shows

Field tournaments such as soccer or baseball

Sporting events such as Spartan Races or Cycle Cross

-27

76 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Table 3-3: User Survey Results: Sorted by Top Unweighted Scores 5

Unweighted Score

Linear recreation such as walking paths, bike paths, or hiking trails

320

378

Nature exploration such as bird watching, nature walks, or lookouts

246

307

Aquatic adventure such as kayaking, paddle boats, or fishing

230

294

Social venues such as picnic areas or shaded gathering spaces

196

289

Nature programs for K-12, college students, or environmental groups

220

271

Camping such as RV, tent, yurt, cabin, or group campgrounds

207

269

State-of-the-Art Nature Center

197

252

Innovative play areas such as adventure playgrounds or themed playgrounds

178

242

Aquatic play such as water slides, wave pool, lazy river, or spray grounds

199

239

Demonstration gardens such as native plant gardens or water-wise gardens

164

228

Community events such as local concerts, car shows, or movie nights

154

214

Skills courses such as ropes course, climbing wall, or zip Line

151

213

Pool activities such as lap swim, water aerobics, or swim lessons

141

192

Retail spaces such as general store, bait shop, camp store, or food trucks

106

168

Outdoor exercise equipment

114

166

Multi-purpose event space such as banquet halls or restaurants

119

165

Olympic venues such as archery and shooting ranges

118

163

Canine activities such as dog training facility or dog park

119

163

Equestrian activities such as horseback riding, event training, or dressage

109

157

Agricultural activities such as corn mazes or farmersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; market

156

Regional events such as major concerts, Battle of the Ring, or equestrian shows

145

Court sports such as tennis, pickleball, basketball, tennis, or sand volleyball

141

Field sports such as soccer, baseball, softball, or frisbee golf

137

Court tournaments such as sand volleyball, tennis, pickleball, or basketball

135

Rolling adventure such as skate parks or bike skills park

117

Field tournaments such as soccer or baseball

117

Sporting events such as Spartan Races or Cycle Cross

106

Program Element

Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand

78 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4 Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand 4.1 Recreation and Park Demographic Profile By analyzing population data, trends emerge that can inform decision making and resource allocation strategies for the provision of parks, recreation, and open space management. This demographic profile was compiled in August 2019 from a combination of sources including the ESRI Business Analyst, American Community Survey, and U.S. Census. The following topics will be covered in detail in this report: • Population Summary • Gender and Age Distribution • Race/Ethnic Character • Health Rankings

• Educational Attainment • Household Data • Employment

4.1.1 Population In 2000, the market area population totaled over 401,000 people according to the U.S. Census; it grew at a rate of 1.75 percent between 2000 and 2010. In 2019, the population within a twentyminute drive of Prado Regional Park is approximately 541,000. The population is expected to grow 1.10 percent between 2019 and 2024, reaching over 571,000 in 2024. This growth rate is faster than is expected in California, at 0.67 percent between 2019 and 2024.

For the purposes of this study, the market area is defined as a 20-minute drive from Prado Regional Park. In Figure 4-1, the dark purple core represents the regional market area. The image to the right shows a close-up map with the center point being Prado Regional Park within a 20-minute drive (see additional information on market areas later in this Chapter). Drive time utilized current street and highway networks assuming a congested level, where only 75% of the speed limit is assumed to occur on freeways and highways. These areas are determined by following networks at 75% of the posted speeds, thereby producing irregular networks versus the more traditional radius circles. This approach is much more accurate and matches actual travel patterns better.

Figure 4-2: Projected Population Trends from 2000 to 2024

Regional Market Area - 100 mile radius

Figure 4-1: Market Area Overview

Expanded Community Market Area- 20-Minute Drive from Prado Regional Park

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 79

80 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.1.2 Age and Gender Distribution

4.1.3 Race/Ethnic Character

The market area surrounding Prado Regional Park has a balance between gender – with approximately 50 percent female and male. This is reflective of the state of California and the United States.

In the United States, communities are generally becoming more diverse. Before comparing this data, it is important to note how the U.S. Census classifies and counts individuals who identify as Hispanic. The Census notes that Hispanic origin can be viewed as the heritage, nationality, lineage, or country of birth of the person or the person’s parents or ancestors before arrival in the United States. In the U.S. Census, people who identify as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish are included in all of the race categories. The graphic below reflects the approximate racial/ethnic population distribution.

Table 4-1: Prado Regional Park Gender Distribution Compared to State and National Averages Market Area

California

USA

2019 Female Population (%)

49.83%

50.28%

50.75%

2019 Male Population (%)

50.17%

49.72%

49.25%

The median age in the market area in 2010 was 32.4 years old, younger than the State of California with a median age of 35 years old. The median age in the market area is expected to increase over time.

2010 32.4

2019 33.9

The market area was very reflective of the state of California, with similar demographic makeup in all race categories. There are significantly more residents in the market area that identify as Hispanic (56%) than California (40%) and the United States (18%). Almost a quarter of respondents stated that they identify as “some other race,” while 15 percent identified as Asian.

2024 35.2

Figure 4-3: Median Age of Prado Regional Park between 2010 and 2024 Looking at the population age breakdown by five-year increments in the figure below, there are a few key conclusions. Age groups in the market area are evenly distributed between the ages of 0 and 59, with each age group making up between 6 and 8 percent of the population. Age groups older than 60 steadily decline from 5 percent of the population to less than one percent for those older than 80. The age distribution is expected to stay relatively the same from 2010 to 2024. The biggest changes expected are for the following age cohorts: 15 to 19 years, 30 to 34 years, and 45 to 49 years, which are all expected to increase approximately 2 percentage points.

2019 Racial/Ethnic Diversity of Market Area

Figure 4-4: 2019 Age Distribution in Prado Regional Park

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 81

4.1.4 Educational Attainment

4.1.5 Household Data

Analyzing the highest levels of educational attainment indicates that the market area had the lowest percentage of those who obtained a graduate/professional level degree (9%), compared to California (13%) and the United States (20%). Over twenty percent of residents had completed high school or received their GED. Table 4-2: 2019 Educational Attainment Level of Education

Market Area

California

8.71%

8.95%

5.22%

9.22%

7.26%

7.07%

20.96%

18.58%

23.00%

2.77%

2.25%

12.18%

23.07%

21.00%

4.00%

Associates Degree

8.09%

7.77%

20.52%

Bachelor's Degree

18.61%

21.35%

8.00%

Graduate/Professional Degree

8.57%

12.84%

19.60%

Less than 9th Grade 9-12th Grade/No Diploma High School Diploma GED/Alternative Credential Some College/No Degree

USA

The median household income in the market area in 2019 is $82,229, compared to the state of California at $74,520. The median home value in the market area is $918,677, higher than the median home value of California overall ($394,012) and the United States ($218,492). The average household size is 3.56 in the market area, compared to 2.92 in California and 2.59 in the United States. About 9 percent of households in the market area receive food stamps, the same rate as California. Approximately 22 percent of residents live with some sort of hearing, vision, cognitive difficulty, ambulatory, self-care, and/or independent living difficulty. This is lower than the national average (25%).

Figure 4-5: Median Household Income Distribution

82 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.1.6 Employment

4.1.7 Health Rankings

Roughly 61 percent of the population is employed in white collar positions, which typically performs managerial, technical, administrative, and/or professional capacities. Approximately 24 percent were employed by blue collar positions, such as construction, maintenance, etc. Approximately 5.9 percent of the population was unemployed in 2019, compared to the United States (4.8%). In terms of commuting, about 20 percent of workers spend seven or more hours commuting back and forth to work each week, and 78 percent of commuters drive alone in a car to work.

Figure 4-7: County Health Ranking. Source: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Figure 4-6: Employment Overview California

Understanding the status of the community’s health can help inform policies related to recreation and fitness. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s County Health Rankings and Roadmaps provide annual insight on the general health of national, state, and county populations. The 2019 Rankings model shown in Figure 4-7 highlights the topic areas reviewed by the Foundation.

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 83

The health ranking measures the health of the population based on “how long people live and how healthy people feel while alive,” coupled with ranking factors including healthy behaviors, clinical care, social and economic, and physical environment factors.1

California

2018 ANNUAL REPORT

Children in Poverty

San Bernardino County Ranked

38th of 58

California Counties for Health

4.1.8 State Health Ranking

Challenges

Strengths

of California health include:

Figure 4-8: 2019 California Health Ranking Overview

18.1%

338.0

SINCE 2017, CHILDREN IN POVERTY* DECREASED 9% FROM 19.9% TO 18.1%

SINCE 2017, MENTAL HEALTH PROVIDERS* INCREASED 7% FROM 315.5 TO 338.0

* Percentage of children aged 0 to 17

* Number per 100,000 population

Primary Care Physicians

In 2019, the United Health Foundation’s America’s Health Rankings Annual Report ranked California as the 12th healthiest state nationally. The health rankings consider and weigh social and environmental factors that tend to directly impact the overall health of state populations as illustrated in Figure 4-8. The state moved up five positions in the ranking since 2017.

• High levels of air pollution • Low immunization coverage among children • Low Tdap immunization

Mental Health Providers

• Low prevalence of obesity • Low infant mortality rate • Low occupational fatality rate

Frequent Mental Distress

138.3

10.8%

SINCE 2017, PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIANS* INCREASED 2% FROM 135.1 TO 138.3

SINCE 2017, FREQUENT MENTAL DISTRESS* INCREASED 2% FROM 10.6% TO 10.8%

* Number per 100,000 population

* Percentage of adults

Suicide

Obesity

11.1

25.1%

SINCE 2017, SUICIDE* INCREASED 3% FROM 10.8 TO 11.1

SINCE 2017, OBESITY* INCREASED FROM 25.0% TO 25.1%

* Deaths per 100,000 population

* Percentage of adults

Top 5 States Source: United Health Foundation’s America’s Health Rankings Annual Report 2018

1: HAWAII

2: MASSACHUSETTS

3: CONNECTICUT

Page 3 of 8

4: VERMONT

5: UTAH

84 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.2 Influencing Trends of Recreation and Users

4.2.1 Local Recreational Expenditure

The changing pace of todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s world requires analyzing recreation trends from both a local and national level. Understanding the participation levels of the market area residents using data from the U.S. Census Bureau, combined with research of relevant national recreation trends, provides critical insights that help to plan for the future of parks and recreation. These new shifts of participation in outdoor recreation, sports, and cultural programs are an important component of understanding and serving the agencyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s community. The market area is defined as a 20-minute drive from Prado Regional Park.

Table 4-3: 2019 Recreational Expenditures in Market Area

Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides insights about consumer expenditures per household in 2019. The following information was sourced from ESRI Business Analyst, which provides a database of programs and services where market area residents spend their money. The table below shows the average dollars spent on various recreational products/services. Money spent related to sports, recreation, and exercise equipment generated the highest expenditures of $38.2 million 2019

Variable

Average

Total

Winter Sports Equipment

$7.90

$1,172,823

Water Sports Equipment

$10.06

$1,493,694

Bicycles

$37.37

$5,549,887

2019 Hunting & Fishing Equipment

$86.90

$12,905,353

Toys/Games/Crafts/Hobbies

$137.90

$20,478,010

Sports/Rec/Exercise Equipment

$257.47

$38,234,533

Fees for Participant Sports excluding Trips

$135.00

$5,256,584

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 85

4.2.2 Outdoor Recreation Behavior

4.2.3 Fitness and Health Behavior

In Figure 4-9, data from ESRI Business Analyst shows popular outdoor recreation activity participation by households in the market area. Compared to the state, the market area had higher participation in the following activities:

The figure below shows household participation in various fitness activities. Participation was higher in the market area than in California specifically in the following activities: Swimming (17%) Walking for Exercise (26%) Weight Lifting (12%)

Road Biking (11%) Power Boating (5%) Fresh Water Fishing (9%) Golf (9%) Hiking (14%) Jogging/Running (16%)

Figure 4-10: Fitness and Wellness Participation of Market Area Compared to the State of California

Figure 4-9: Outdoor Recreation Behavior of Market Area Compared to the State of California

86 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.2.4 Team Sport Participation According to census data, households in the market area had nearly the same level of participation as the state of California as a whole. Basketball, soccer, baseball, and football were ranked as the top team sports by participation in 2019.

4.2.5 Active Transportation In many surveys and studies on participation in recreational activities, walking, running, jogging and cycling are nearly universally rated as the most popular activities among youths and adults. Walking, jogging and running are often the most highly participated in recreational activity and cycling often ranks as the second or third most popular activity.

These activities are attractive as they require little equipment or financial investment to get started, and are open to participation to nearly all segments of the population. For these reasons, participation in these activities is often promoted as a means of spurring physical activity, and increasing public health. The design of a community’s infrastructure is directly linked to physical activity – where environments are built with bicyclists and pedestrians in mind, more people bike and walk. Higher levels of bicycling and walking also coincide with increased bicycle and pedestrian safety and higher levels of physical activity. Increasing bicycling and walking in a community can have a major impact on improving public health and life expectancy. The following trends, as well as health and economic indicators, are pulled from the Alliance for Biking and Walking’s 2012 and 2014 Benchmarking Reports: Figure 4-11: Team Sport Household Participation in Market Area compared to State of California

Public health trends related to bicycling and walking include: Quantified health benefits of active transportation can outweigh any risks associated with the activities by as much as 77 to 1, and add more years to our lives than are lost from inhaled air pollution and traffic injuries. Between 1966 and 2009, the number of children who bicycled or walked to school fell 75 percent, while the percentage of obese children rose 276 percent. Bicycling to work significantly reduces absenteeism due to illness. Regular bicyclists took 7.4 sick days per year, while non-bicyclists took 8.7 sick days per year. Economic benefits of bicycling and walking include: Bicycling and walking projects create 8 to 12 jobs per $1 million spent, compared to just 7 jobs created per $1 million spent on highway projects. Cost benefit analyses show that up to $11.80 in benefits can be gained for every $1 invested in bicycling and walking.

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 87

National bicycling trends: There has been a gradual trend of increasing bicycling and walking to work since 2005. Infrastructure to support biking communities is becoming more commonly funded in communities. Bike share systems, making bicycles available to the public for low-cost, short-term use, have been sweeping the nation since 2010. Twenty of the most populous U.S. cities have a functional bike share system.

4.2.6 Aquatics and Water Recreation Trends According to the National Sporting Goods Association (NSGA), swimming ranked second nationwide in terms of participation in 2018.2 Nationally, there is an increasing trend towards indoor leisure and therapeutic pools. Swimming for fitness continues to be the top aspirational activity for “inactives” in all age groups, according to the Sports & Fitness Industry Association (SFIA) 2016 Sports, Fitness and Leisure Activities Topline Participation Report, representing a significant opportunity to engage inactive populations. Additional indoor and outdoor amenities like “spray pads” or “splash pads” are becoming increasingly popular as well. In some cities and counties, spray pools are popular in the summer months and turn into ice rinks in the winter months. In this maturing market, communities are looking for atmosphere, an extension of surroundings either natural or built. Communities are also concerned about water quality as well as conservation. Interactive fountains are a popular alternative, ADA-compliant and low maintenance.

4.2.7 Community Gardens Communities around the country are building gardens for a number of far-reaching environmental and social impacts. According to GreenLeaf Communities, which supports scientific research in environmental and human health, community gardens offer benefits including:3 Environmental Reducing waste through composting Improving water infiltration Increasing biodiversity of animals and plants Improving air and soil quality

Social Increasing intake of vegetables and fruits Promoting relaxation and improving mental health Increasing physical activity Reducing risk of obesity and obesity-related diseases

Some studies show that community gardens can improve the well-being of the entire community by bringing residents together and creating social ties. This activity can reduce crime, particularly if gardens are located in vacant lots. In fact, vacant land has the opposite effect of community gardens, including increased litter, chemical and tire dumping, drug use, and decreased property values. By creating community gardens, neighborhoods can teach useful skills in gardening, food production, selling, and business. The National Recreation and Park Association published an indepth guide to building a community garden in parks through the Grow Your Park Initiative, which can be found on their website.4

4.2.8 Conservation One of the key pillars of parks and recreation is the role that it plays in conservation. Managing and protecting open space, providing opportunities for people to connect with nature, and educating communities about conservation are all incredibly important. One of the key components of conservation is addressing climate change. Local parks and recreation can help by building climate resilient communities through water management, green infrastructure, and sustainability. A report by NRPA in 2017 titled “Park and Recreation Sustainability Practices” surveyed over 400 park and recreation agencies and found the top five ways that local departments are taking action on conservation and climate change include: Active Transportation – 77% reduce their carbon footprint by encouraging active transportation Watershed Management – 70% adopt protective measures for watershed management Air Quality – 53% plant and manage tree canopies that improves air quality Sustainable Education – 52% educate the public about sustainability practices 5 Stormwater Management – 51% proactivity reduce stormwater through green infrastructure

88 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.2.9 Economic and Health Benefits of Parks In 2017, the Outdoor Industry Association estimated that national consumer spending on outdoor recreation generated $887 billion in consumer spending, and directly supported 7.6 million jobs. Trails, parks, and playgrounds are among the most important community amenities considered when selecting a home. U.S. Forest Service research indicates that when economic benefits produced by trees are assessed, the total value can be two to six times the cost for tree planting and care.9 10 Nearly half of active Americans regard outdoor activities as their main source of exercise.

Physical activity makes people healthier. Physical activity increases with access to parks. Contact with the natural world improves physical and physiological health. Residential and commercial property values increase. Value is added to community and economic development sustainability. Benefits of tourism are enhanced. Trees are effective in improving air quality and act as natural air conditioners. Trees assist with storm water control and erosion. Crime and juvenile delinquency are reduced. Recreational opportunities for all ages are provided. Stable neighborhoods and strong communities are created.

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 89

4.2.10 Generational Fitness Trends

4.2.11 Generational Trends in Recreation

As Baby Boomers enter retirement, they will be looking for opportunities in fitness, sports, outdoors, arts and cultural events, and other activities that suit their lifestyles. With their varied life experiences, values, and expectations, Baby Boomers are predicted to redefine the meaning of recreation and leisure programming for mature adults. Boomers are second only to Generation Y and Millennials in participation in fitness and outdoor sports.12

Activity participation varies based on age, but it also varies based on generational preferences. In regard to generational activity, according to the SFIA report, Millennials had the highest percentage of those who were “active to a healthy level,” but a quarter also remained sedentary. Nearly 28 percent of Generation X were inactive, with Baby Boomers at 33 percent inactive. Baby Boomers prefer low impact fitness activities such as swimming, cycling aquatic exercise, and walking for fitness.

Boomers will look to park and recreation professionals to provide opportunities to enjoy many lifelong hobbies and sports. When programming for this age group, a customized experience to cater to the need for self-fulfillment, healthy pleasure, nostalgic youthfulness, and individual escapes will be important. Recreation trends will shift from games and activities that boomers associate with senior citizens. Ziegler suggests that activities such as bingo, bridge, and shuffleboard will likely be avoided because boomers relate these activities with old age.

Generation Alpha

~ Born 2010 - Present

Generation Z

Born 1997 - 2010

Millennials

Born 1981 - 1996

Generation X

Born 1965 - 1980

Baby Boomers

Born 1946 - 1964

Silent Generation

Born 1928 - 1945

A condensed list of generational trends which may impact recreational services are below: Baby Boomers are staying in the workforce longer than generations before them13 Almost a third of millennials are not affiliated with religion, and half of them describe themselves as political independents14 Approximately 13 percent of teens (Generation Z) said they’ve had a major depressive episode in the last year15 Those 60 and older (Baby Boomers) spend more of their leisure time (about 4 hours) a day in front of a screen16 Generation Z is the most racially and ethnically diverse generation, with only 52 percent identifying as non-Hispanic whites.17 Millennials have more financial hardships, such as student loan debt, poverty and unemployment, and lower levels of wealth, but are optimistic about their future18

Figure 4-12: Fitness Participation by Generation. Source: SFIA Topline Report

90 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.2.12 Golf Courses The recent decline in golf participation has agencies and stakeholders wondering about the future of golf. According to the National Golf Foundation (NGF), from 1980 to 2000, the number of golfers grew 50 percent to almost 300 million participants. Since 2000, participation has plateaued and declined, as evidence in Figure 4-14 from the NGF. Youth sports organizations, such as The First Tee, are garnering support and engagement for golf by engaging with kids.19 Although the National Golf Foundation is optimistic about the future of golf (they expect a 1% annual growth rate), variations of the sport are growing in popularity. There are many alternative uses of golf courses that should be considered if participation does not reach desired goals. Some of the following ideas have been implemented on golf courses around the country. Maintenance and management of the golf course should always be considered before transitioning a golf course to a multi-purpose facility. Disc Golf- According to the Professional Disc Golf Association (PDGA), disc golf has increased in participation significantly since its initial start in 1975. Approximately 92 percent of players are male and 8 percent female. In 2018, PDGA had 46,457 active members; 2,496 were under 18. In 2010, the number of disc golf courses worldwide was 3,276. In 2018, that number increased more than 150 percent to 8,364. The majority of play takes place in the United States. 31 Footgolf- A true mix of soccer and golf, footgolf is a sport played on a golf course where the players goal is to kick a soccer ball into a cup in as few shots as possible. The sport was invented

in 2009 and most formal league play is managed through American FootGolf League. Footgolf is an international sport, and it is estimated to be played in over 20 countries. 32 According to the World Golf Foundation study on Alternative Golf Experiences (2015), Footgolf is estimated to be in 445 facilities in worldwide. Approximately 87 percent of participants are very likely to continue playing, and 81 percent are satisfied with Footgolf.. 33 5k run/walks- Perhaps one of the most well-known recreational activities is the road race. The most popular race distance is the 5k. There were approximately 8.84 million registrants for 5ks in the United States in 2017, claiming 49 percent of all registrants (compared to the half-marathon at number two with 11 percent of all registrants). Women make up about 59 percent of participants with 41 percent being male. 34 Fat Biking- One of the newest trends in adventure cycling is “fat bike,” multiple speed bikes that are made to ride where other bikes can’t be ridden, with tires that are up to 5 inches wide run at low pressure for extra traction. Most fat bikes are used to ride on snow but they are also very effective for riding on any loose surface like sand or mud. They also work well on most rough terrain or just riding through the woods. This bike offers unique opportunities to experience nature in ways that wouldn’t be possible otherwise. 35 Special Events-Golf courses can provide an ideal venue for special events. With an often picturesque viewshed and well-maintained landscaping, golf courses are becoming more popular for events such as banquets, conferences, and weddings.

Figure 4-13: Golf Participation, Year after Year (1986 – 2009). Source: 2010 National Golf Foundation.

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 91

4.2.13 Private Public Partnerships Municipal parks and recreation structures and delivery systems have changed as more alternative methods of delivering services are emerging. Certain services are being contracted out and cooperative agreements with non-profit groups and other public institutions are being developed. Newer partners include the health system, social services, justice system, education, the corporate sector, and community service agencies. These partnerships reflect both a broader interpretation of the mandate of parks and recreation agencies and the increased willingness of other sectors to work together to address community issues. The relationship with health agencies is vital in promoting wellness. The traditional relationship with education and the sharing of facilities through joint-use agreements is evolving into cooperative planning and programming aimed at addressing youth inactivity levels and community needs. In addition, the role of parks and recreation management has shifted beyond traditional facility oversight and activity programming. The ability to evaluate and interpret data is a critical component of strategic decision making. In an article in the Parks and Recreation Magazine from February 2019, there are several components that allow agencies to keep up with administrative trends and become an agent of change.20 1. Develop a digital transformation strategy – how will your agency innovate and adapt to technology? 2. Anticipate needs of the community through data – what information from your facilities, programs, and services can be collected and utilized for decision making? 3. Continuous education - how can you educate yourself and your team to have more knowledge and skills as technology evolves? 4. Focus on efficiency – in what ways can your operations be streamlined? 5. Embrace change as a leader – how can you help your staff to see the value in new systems and processes? 6. Reach out digitally – be sure that the public knows how to find you and ways that they can be involved.

4.2.14 Senior Programming Many older adults and seniors are choosing to maintain active lifestyles and recognize the health benefits of regular physical activities. With the large number of adults in these age cohorts, many communities have found a need to offer more programming, activities, and facilities that support the active lifestyle this generation desires.

Public parks and recreation agencies are increasingly expected to be significant providers of such services and facilities. The American Academy of Sports Medicine issues a yearly survey of the top 20 fitness trends.21 It ranks senior fitness programs eighth among most popular fitness trends for 2015. Whether it’s Silver Sneakers, a freestyle low-impact cardio class, or water aerobics, more Americans are realizing the many benefits of staying active throughout life. According to the National Sporting Goods Association, popular senior programming trends include hiking, birding, and swimming.

4.2.15 Shade Structures Communities around the country are considering adding shade structures as well as shade trees to their parks, playgrounds and pools, as “a weapon against cancer and against childhood obesity”22; both to reduce future cancer risk and to promote exercise among children. A study found that melanoma rates in people under 20 rose three percent a year between 1973 and 2001, possibly due to a thinning of the ozone layer in the atmosphere. It is recommended that children seek shade between 10am and 4pm, but with so little shade available, kids have nowhere to go. Additionally, without adequate shade, many play areas are simply too hot to be inviting to children. On sunny days, the playground equipment is hot enough to scald the hands of would-be users. Trees would help provide protection, as tree leaves absorb about 95 percent of ultraviolet radiation, but they take a decade or more to grow large enough to make a difference. So, many communities are building shade structures instead. The non-profit Shade Foundation of American is a good resource for information about shade and shade structures, www.shadefoundation.org.

92 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.2.16 Synthetic Turf Demand for fields has risen with the popularity of youth and adult sports. Synthetic turf can solve many challenges for parks and recreation departments because they can withstand the constant use from players. They require less maintenance than natural turf fields, and are not easily damaged in wet weather conditions. Synthetic turf requires some periodic maintenance, which includes brushing the turf to stand up the fibers, which allows it to wear better, the addition of infill in high traffic areas (soccer goals, corner kicks, etc), and an annual deep cleaning. Synthetic turf costs significantly more upfront, and they require replacement about every ten years. This type of replacement can have a large environmental and economic footprint unless the products can be recycled, reused, or composted. Safety concerns primarily stem the chemicals found in crumb rubber. For the last 20 years, crumb rubber has been the common choice for fields. It often has a distinct plastic smell, and can leach chemicals, like zinc, into downstream waters. There are also concerns about off-gassing of crumb rubber and the potential health impacts of this material. Fortunately, advances in technology have allowed for new innovative products to be developed without crumb rubber including Nike Grind made of rubber outsoles, Thermoplastic elastomer which is a plastic recyclable pellet that feels like rubber, Ethylene propylene diene monomer which is a synthetic rubber, acrylic polymer coated sand such as Envirofill which protects from mold, mildew, and bacteria, or organic infill such as coconut fibers, cork, or processed nutshells. New innovations have allowed more sustainable and safer synthetic turf to be used by athletes, thereby removing the negative perception. In the future, shock pads may become commonplace â&#x20AC;&#x201C; this is the layer under the turf that can absorb an impact and reduce the chance of a concussion. The incorporation of non-rubber infills will continue to grow.

Engaging non-participants is one of the challenges of parks and recreation agencies. According to the 2018 SFIA report, Income has been seen to impact activity rates; those households making under $50,000 are significantly less active than those making more. Data shows that having someone to join first time users will increase participation more than any other reason.

4.2.17 Sports Trends According to the Sports and Fitness Industry Association, high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and cross-training style workouts, or CrossFit, are two of the top trending aerobic activities. CrossFit combines elements of gymnastics, weightlifting, running, rowing, and other sports to create a varied fitness regime. Hockey, rugby, and lacrosse have all experienced an increase of participation nationwide. Although roller skating and ice skating have declined in participation, field hockey and ice hockey have both seen growth. Field hockey, from 2016 to 2017, grew 15.9 percent. Ice hockey has grown 2.8 percent average annually for the last five years. With regard to individual sports, off-road triathlons have seen an almost 17 percent average annual growth for the last five years. These races, such as XTERRAs, consist of a competitive combination of swimming, mountain biking, and trail running. Stand up paddling (SUP) has seen, on average, 20 percent annual growth in the last five years. According to the 2018 SFIA, Millennials are more likely than other generations to engage in water sports. Pickleball, a paddle sport mixing badminton, tennis, and table tennis, is still trending, gaining an average 8 percent growth each year. Growing even slightly faster is Cardio Tennis at 9.1 percent. Cardio Tennis is a fitness program that focuses on combining a full body workout with elements of tennis.

Table 4-4: Sports Trends. Source: Sports, Fitness, and Leisure Activities Tapline Participation Report, 2012-1027.

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 93

4.2.18 Trail Systems A connected system of trails increases the level of physical activity in a community, according to the Trails for Health initiative of the (CDC).23 Trails can provide a wide variety of opportunities for being physically active, such as walking/running/hiking, roller blading, wheelchair recreation, bicycling, cross-country skiing and snowshoeing, fishing, hunting, and horseback riding. Recognizing that active use of trails for positive health outcomes is an excellent way to encourage people to adopt healthy lifestyle changes, American Trails has launched a “Health and Trails” resource section on its website: www.americantrails.org/resources/benefits/. The health benefits are equally as high for trails in urban neighborhoods as for those in state or national parks. A trail in the neighborhood, creating a ‘linear park’, makes it easier for people to incorporate exercise into their daily routines, whether for recreation or non-motorized transportation. Urban trails need to connect people to places they want to go, such as schools, transit centers, businesses, and neighborhoods.24

For trail-related recreation activities such as hiking, bicycling, and running, the 2016 Outdoor Recreation Topline Report indicates a positive three-year trend for trail running, running/jogging, hiking, mountain biking and BMX biking, as shown on Table 4-5. Additionally, participation in trail running and BMX biking is up significantly over the recent three-year period.

Table 4-5: Cycling and Trail Recreation Participation by Activity (Ages 6+). Source: 2016 Outdoor Recreation Participation Topline Report. 2013 BMX Bicycling Bicycling (Mountain/Non-Paved Surface) Bicycling (Road/Paved Surface) Hiking (Day) Running/Jogging Trail Running

2,168 8,542 40,888 34,378 51,127 6,792

2014 2,350 8,044 39,725 36,222 49,408 7,531

2015 2,690 8,316 38,280 37,232 48,496 8,139

3 Year Average Change 7.5% 2.8% -0.8% 2.6% -2.3% 10.7%

Other Cycling Trends Bicycle touring is becoming a fast-growing trend around the world, including the United States and Canada. “Travelers are seeking out bike tours to stay active, minimize environmental impact, and experience diverse landscapes and cityscapes at a closer level.”25 Urban bike tours, popular in cycle-friendly cities in Europe, are taking hold in the United States as well. Bikes and Hikes LA, an eco-friendly bike and hike sightseeing company founded in 2018, offers visitors the opportunity to “see the city’s great outdoors while getting a good workout.” In New York, a hotel and a bike store are partnering to offer guests cruisers to explore the city during the summer of 2014.26 One of the newest trends in adventure cycling is “fat bike,” multiple speed bikes that are made to ride where other bikes can’t be ridden, with tires that are up to 5 inches wide run at low pressure for extra traction. Most fat bikes are used to ride on snow, but they are also very effective for riding on any loose surface like sand or mud. They also work well on most rough terrain or just riding through the woods. This bike offers unique opportunities to experience nature in ways that wouldn’t be possible otherwise.27 Electric Assist Bikes, or e-bikes, are becoming commonplace on both paved and non-paved surfaces. For commuters, this option allows for a quick, convenient, and environment-friendly method of transportation. Speeds vary based on the types of e-bikes, which are typically broken down into two classes: » Class 1 e-bikes provide electrical assistance only while the rider is pedaling. Electrical assistance stops when the bicycle reaches 20 mph. » Class 2 e-bikes provide electrical assistance regardless if the rider is pedaling or not. Electrical assistance stops when the bicycle reaches 20 mph.

94 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Agencies around the country are working to proactively regulate e-bikes on their trails and greenways. Federally, e-bikes are classified as motorized vehicles, which designates them to be used specifically on motorized trails, which includes the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and National Forest (USFS) lands. Statewide, there are also regulations which should be considered at a local level in regards to allowing electrical assisted bicycles on bike paths, pedestrian paths, and multi-purpose trails. Agencies such as Boulder County in Colorado are implementing pilot programs to test the potential of e-bikes on trails and the impact that they have to the environment, other trail users, and wildlife.28

The Benefits of Parks: Why America Needs More City Parks and Open Space, a report from the Trust for Public Land, makes the following observations about the health, economic, environmental, and social benefits of parks and open space:30 Physical activity makes people healthier Physical activity increases with access to parks Contact with the natural world improves physical and physiological health Residential and commercial property values increase Value is added to community and economic development sustainability Benefits of tourism are enhanced Trees are effective in improving air quality and act as natural air conditioners Trees assist with storm water control and erosion Crime and juvenile delinquency are reduced Recreational opportunities for all ages are provided Stable neighborhoods and strong communities are created

4.2.19 Health Trends Research has shown that parks and recreation agencies can have a positive influence on social and physical behavior resulting in: Increase physical activity Enhance social and parental engagement Improve nutrition Better transportation and access to facilities and spaces Perceptions of personal and community safety Reductions of smoking, alcohol, and drug use

These factors can be addressed through collaborations with a variety of community partners or “actors”, such as schools, public health, medical, other governmental agencies, and private and non-profit sectors.29

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 95

4.3 Recreational Market Areas It is critical to evaluate different market areas that might attract users to the park to understand the types of activities that should be offered within the park in relation to the types of programs that are already offered in each market area. Market area studies identify potential over-saturation and can identify a need for a specific program or activity that is not currently offered. The vision statement, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Prado Regional Park will be a premier park for southern California and will include amenities and activities that will make it a first choice for a regional recreation destinationâ&#x20AC;? highlights the fact that this park could potentially have a regional draw from people all over southern California and so it is important that this study identify these recreational market areas. When determining market areas, it is industry-standard to utilize a radius from the point of origin. However, a more accurate analysis defines market areas as the area accessible from an origin by traveling along the road network at posted or realistic speeds. These areas are typically referred to as drivesheds. Both methods are accepted forms of analysis with varying degrees of refinement. For the purposes of this study, the local community, expanded community, and sub-regional areas utilize driveshed analysis; whereas, the regional market area utilizes a radius due to limited road data available for the more comprehensive analysis. In a driveshed analysis, the posted speeds are typically utilized; however, in southern California, it is broadly known that traffic and congestion almost always play a part in drive speeds. This analysis takes into account traffic and considers a 25% reduction in posted speeds to account for roadway crowding and reduced travel distances within a given time frame. Though peak congestion may slow traffic much more, the typical times of travel for recreation, sports practice, and tourism travel is often not during peak hours. A summary of the different market areas is explained in the maps, Figure 4-18 to Figure 4-15 and following text.

4.3.1 Local Community The local community market area for Prado Regional Park is defined by the 20-minute driveshed. This area includes user groups who possibly visit the site daily for recreational purposes and may use the park similar to the way someone would use a neighborhood or community park. This market area expands into the adjacent cities including Chino, Chino Hills, Eastvale, Ontario, Corona, Norco, and Eastvale. According to the 2017 ACS population, this market area covers approximately 503,976 people.

4.3.2 Expanded Community The expanded community market area is defined by the 20-40 minute driveshed. This area picks up another 1,812,472 people as it expands into the populated areas of Los Angeles County and reaches as far east as Brea and Industry. With the combined local and expanded community market areas, the total number of people that can access Prado Regional Park within 40 minutes is 2,316,449. It is not unreasonable to assume that someone within this area would visit the park on a weekly basis if there were improved or new facilities available to them. In addition, local groups within this area, such as schools, might us the park for field trips or office events.

4.3.3 Sub-Regional Typical sub-regional users would be those who seek out activities that are offered within the park multiple times a year, mostly on the weekends or for larger events, sport tournaments, or special activities. The sub-regional driveshed between 40-90 minutes includes just under 10 million people and expands into the beach cities to the west, Dana Point to the south, Yucaipa to the east, and almost reaches Hesperia to the north. Inclusive of the local- and expanded-community users, the total reach is 12,298,930 people within 90 minutes of the park.

4.3.4 Regional Regional market covers the largest geographic area, a 100-mile radius from the park. Exclusive of the local-community, expanded-community, and sub-regional market areas, this area captures approximately 9,401,177 people. In total, Prado Regional Park market areas have just under 22 million people. This area expands from Ventura south to the U.S.Mexican border. The regional users are those who might visit the park for extended days, but also visit the park for special events or tournaments similar to those within the subregional area.

96 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Figure 4-14: Travelsheds Overview

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 97

Figure 4-15: Regional Market Area

98 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Figure 4-16: Sub-Regional Market Area

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 99

Figure 4-17: Expanded-Community Market Area

100 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Figure 4-18: Local Community Market Area

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 101

4.4 Existing Recreation in the Market Area Once various market areas are established and mapped, it is critical to evaluate existing facilities within the different areas to determine the recreational need in addition to looking at recreational trends in the region. Market research is an important component in determining whether a new program or facility will be successful, and this research should be done prior to investing in upgrades or new programs and facilities. This report gives a broad overview of the potential needs, but a more detailed feasibility and needs assessment is recommended prior to making any investment.

4.4.1 Local Community Market Area Within the local market area, there are a total of 104 parks, including several community parks and sports complexes. Within these specific parks, there are a total of 18 soccer fields and 1 aquatic feature. These parks are most likely to be direct competition with Prado Regional Park when considering someone who might visit a park on a weekly or daily basis.

4.4.2 Expanded Community Market Area When the market area is widened to the expanded market area, there are about 361 community parks, open spaces, trails, historic park, sports complexes, and several regional parks. Aquatic features within 12 of these parks range from wading pools, splash pads, recreational pools, diving boards, water slides, to lap pools. By expanding the area, there are around a total of 86 soccer fields in various parks.

Local Community Market Area

Parks

Soccer Fields

Aquatic Features

Expanded Community Market Area

104

361

102 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.4.3 Water Parks When looking at waterparks and aquatic centers, there are a range of indoor and outdoor waterparks, amusement parks, pools, and spray grounds. There are two competing waterparks within the local community market area, most of them in the sub-regional market area. The majority of these are under private ownership. Table 4-6: Water Parks within 100 Miles of Prado Name

Facility Type

City

Miles From Prado

Ownership

The Cove Waterpark

Waterpark

Riverside

Private

Buccaneer's Cove at Castle Park

Waterpark within amusement park

Riverside

Private

Cucamonga Guasti Regional Park

Waterpark features within county park

Ontario

Public

Raging Waters Los Angeles

Waterpark

San Dimas

Private

Fontana Park Aquatic Center

Pool and Spraygrounds

Fontana

Public

Glen Helen Regional Park

Waterpark within regional park

San Bernardino

Public

Great Wolf Lodge

Indoor Waterpark and Theme Park

Garden Grove

Private

Knott's Soak City

Waterpark

Buena Park

Private

Splash Kingdom Waterpark

Waterpark

Redlands

Private

Splash Zone

Waterpark features within city park

Rosemead

Public

City Terrace Waterpark

Waterpark features within city park

Los Angeles

Public

Terramor Aquatic Park

Waterpark

Mission Viejo

Private

Orange Avenue Splash Zone

Waterpark features within city park

Paramount

Public

Yucaipa Regional Park

Waterpark features and lagoon

Yucaipa

Public

DropZone Waterpark

Waterpark

Perris

Private

Alondra Park Splash Pad

Waterpark features within city park

Paramount

Public

Universal City

Private

Super Silly Fun Land - Universal Studios Waterpark within amusement park Six Flags Hurricane Harbor

Waterpark

Valencia

Private

The Wave Waterpark

Waterpark

Vista

Private

DryTown Waterpark

Waterpark

Palmdale

Private

The Wave Waterpark

Waterpark and Pool

Vista

Public

Town Square Park / Panorama Park

Private Waterpark / Theme Park

Cathedral City

Private

Wet and Wild

Waterpark and Lagoon

Palm Springs

Private

Aquatica

Waterpark

San Diego

115

Private

Approximate Market Area

Local Community Expanded Community

Sub-regional

Regional

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 103

4.4.4 Equestrian Facilities There are three equestrian centers with multiple arenas within the local community market area. The facility types include show and jumping arenas, trails, jumping, show barns, and dressage. Several of these facilities are spread throughout the 100 mile radius of Prado Regional Park. Table 4-7: Equestrian Parks within 100 Miles of Prado Name

Facility Type

The Ranch at Silver Lakes

Five Arenas

McCoy Equestrian Center

Barn, and Arenas

Norco Equestrian Academy

City

Miles From Prado

Norco

Chino Hills

Multiple Arenas

Norco

Peacock Hill Equestrian Center

Dressage, Arena and Trails

Irvine

Orange Park Arenas

Jumping Arena, Show Arena & Trails

Orange

Anaheim Equestrian

Lighted Arenas

Anaheim

Moonstone Riding Academy

Jumping Arenas, Show Barn

Silverado

Nellie Gail Ranch Equestrian Center

Arenas, Jumping, Trails

Laguna Hills

Bridges Equestrian

Riding Academy

San Juan Capistrano

Huntington Beach

Huntington Central Park Equestrian Center Multiple Arenas and Trails Lake Perris Fair Grounds

Arenas

County of Riverside

Rancho Sierra Vista Equestrian

Multiple Arenas

San Juan Capistrano

LA Equestrian Center

Horse Shows

Burbank

Enterprise Farms

Dressage, Horse Shows, Riding Center

Los Angeles

Shadow Hills Equestrian Center

Jumping Arena, Dressage, Trails

Lake View Terrace

Deer Springs Equestrian Center

Multiple Arenas

San Marcos

Jump for Joy

Jumping, Dressage, Trails

Saugus

Horsemen's Center

Two Arenas, BMX Park, Primitive Tent Site

Apple Valley

Del Mar National Horse Show Fairgrounds

Major Arena/Venues

Del Mar

Spirit Equestrian Barron Gate

Multiple Arenas and Trails

Somis

Approximate Market Area

Local Community

Expanded Community

Sub-regional

Regional

104 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.4.5 Soccer For the purposes of this analysis, soccer centers with at lease five fields were evaluated within the market area. There was a large mixture of private, public, and public-private partnership when looking at the ownership of each facility. The two largest facilities, one located in Norco, which is within the local community market area, includes over 24 fields plus an arena with a capacity of 2,500-5,000 people. Table 4-8: Soccer Centers within 100 Miles of Prado

Name

Facility Type

City

Miles from Prado

Ruben Ayala Park

10 Fields plus Arena

Chino

Silver Lakes Soccer Complex

24 Fields plus Arena for 5,000 Persons

Norco

Rancho Mission Viejo Riding Park

6 Fields

Mission Viejo

Chino Hills Community Park

5 Fields

Chino Hills

Ontario Soccer Complex

1 Tournament, 6 other Fields

Ontario

Cabrillo Park Soccer Complex

6 Fields

Upland

Upland Sports Arena

4 Indoor Fields and Arena

Upland

Pomona Fairplex

5 Fields

Pomona

AB Brown Sports Complex

24 Fields

Riverside

American Sports Center

9 Indoor Fields

Anaheim

Orange County Great Park

24 plus Arena for 2,500 persons

Irvine

Cerritos Sports Complex

6 Fields

Cerritos

Westminster High School

5 Fields plus Stadium

Westminster

Oso Viejo Community Park

6 Fields

Mission Viejo

Aliso Viejo Community Park

5 Fields

Mission Viejo

Ranch Soccer Complex

7 Fields

San Juan Capistrano

Los Alamos Hills Sports Park

11 Fields

Murrieta

Cal State Dominguez Hills

6 Fields

Carson

Patricia Birdsall Sports Park

5 Fields

Temecula

Galway Downs

24 Fields

Temecula

Toyota Sports Complex

12 Fields

Torrance

Pierce College

12 Fields

Woodland Hills

Oceanside SoCal Sports Complex

20 Fields

Oceanside

Central Park Santa Clarita

5 Fields

Santa Clarita

Frances Ryan Park

8 full Sized Soccer Fields

Escondido

4S Ranch

6 Fields

Chula Vista

Del Mar Polo Fields / Carmel Valley

20 Fields

Del Mar

Oxnard College Park

6 Fields

Camino del Sol

100

Approximate Market Area

Local Community

Expanded Community

Sub-regional

Regional

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 105

4.5 Revenue sources in the park

4.5.3 Existing and potential user fees

4.5.1 Existing and potential lease fees

While Prado Regional Park’s website promotes the all-in-one recreational destination the fee structure is quite complicated with over 25 different fees that may be associated with entrance to the park exclusive of any concessionaire fees. A review of user fees for other San Bernardino County Regional Parks such as Moabi, Mojave Narrows, Mojave River Forks, Yucaipa indicate that the user fees across the County’s regional park system are consistent. A potential recommendation would be to simplify the user fees to allow for an easier to understand fee system for park users. Increasing the fees at Prado Regional Park would not be recommended as the Park is part of the County’s larger regional park system.

Existing lease agreements include the following concessionaires: Oranco Bowmen, Inc., Archery Range (expired June 2012) $300 per month Equestrian Center (expired 2002) $30,000 annually Pomona Valley Model Airplane Club (expired 2003) $500 annually Prado family Shooting Center (expired 2009) $ 1,000 monthly of 3% of gross income Prado Golf Course (expired 2015) % of gross revenue

A review of the concession workbook financials provided by the County shows that the Archery Range and Airplane Club pay monthly fees while the Equestrian Center, Shooting Center, and Golf Course pay a percentage of gross revenues. The annual revenues collected by the County have been consistent over the three-year period reviewed (2016-2019) with 2018 showing the highest revenue. The review of existing concessionaire leases indicates all of the concessionaire leases have expired and new contract negotiations should be conducted to allow for new five-year renewable leases that are beneficial for both the County and the concessionaires.

4.5.2 Existing and potential gate fees Prado Regional Park’s website promotes the all-in-one recreational destination that has many outdoor recreation and adventure offerings. Many of the activities offered by the County such as fishing, camping, hiking, biking, nature trails, disc golf and picnicking are highlighted along with opportunities offered by several concessionaires such as golf, horseback riding, shooting activities, and archery. Including the activities offered by the dog park and model airplane club, as well as some of the typical special events such as the Spartan Games is recommended to be added to the description to round out the offerings currently available at Prado Regional Park. Links for a more in depth look at the activities, multi-purpose room, Prado Fees, and Prado concessions are included. A link to typical special events and a calendar of special events that is updated regularly would be recommended to help promote the activities at the park.

106 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.5.4 Economic benefit summary or Prado Regional Park

4.5.5 Future potential economic benefit of changes

There are numerous economic and health benefits of parks, including the following:

Fields and Additional Amenities

Local, regional and state jobs Wages and salaries for employees of the park and the concessionaires Consumer spending in the region State and County tax revenue Trails, parks, and playgrounds are among the five most important community amenities considered when selecting a home.

Opportunities for expanding participation through sports tourism in the County are currently available. Adding additional fields, amenities and facilities would need to be considered. Typically, a community can attract individual sports participants within a 30-minute drive for regular participation. Participants driving up to 90 minutes or more typically involve multiple family members who are looking for additional amenities such as restaurants, shopping, entertainment and hotels. Festivals and Special Events

The role of public parks and recreation as a health promotion and prevention agency has come of age. What matters is refocusing its efforts to insure the health, well-being, and economic prosperity of communities and citizens.

Earth Economics, 2011

Festivals and other special events are often popular activities in communities that not only entertain, generate economic activity, and serve to celebrate community identity, they are also means of introducing people to Prado Regional Park. Festival and special events can draw new users into the park. Attendants to events hosted in parks, who enjoy their experience may want to return for another event or program, or simply to enjoy the park. Participants in these special programs can become interested in visiting other parks, recreation facilities or participating in programs throughout the County as well.

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 107

4.6 Initial Market Demand and Feasibility Analysis Prado Regional Park is unique in that it sits in the midst of an urban setting. Individuals may drive hours and even days to experience the unique setting that nature provides. In addition, the area around the park becomes more and more populated as new housing developments are built and there is a need to meet recreational requirements. Some initial programs and activities were considered based on the user survey when thinking about market demand and feasibility.

Local market research indicates a need for camping facilities. Additionally, camping facilities will add synergy to the other amenities in the park and provide support for the other activities.

4.6.1 Camping

This facility could be operated by the County or a concessionaire. If operated by the County, this type of facility would require staffing, possibly one FTE to schedule and coordinate reservations and activities and enough part time staff to cover supervision of the facility.

Camping, including RV, tent, yurt, cabin or group campgrounds rated 7th for activities on the survey. Recreational trends indicate that camping, such as RV, tent, yurt, cabin or group campgrounds could be successful with the best chance for revenue neutral or positive revenue situations. This facility, combined with access to the other features of Prado Regional Park, would be attractive to both campers looking for activities and users of the other areas of the park looking for local accommodations.

Primitive tent camping site

During stakeholder interviews, the need for this type of facility was mentioned repeatedly as an opportunity to attract users to the park for extended stays.

This facility could potentially attract groups such as Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, youth groups and church groups looking for multi-day activities and experiences. It is recommended that if the facility is operated by a concessionaire, the County should receive a percentage of the gross revenue, and the concessionaire be required to submit a five-year business plan.

RV camping site

108 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.6.2 Swimming and Aquatic Facilities Aquatic recreation such as kayaking, paddle boats, or fishing rated 4th for activities on the survey. Aquatic play including water slides, wave pools, lazy rivers, or spray grounds rated 12th, and pool activities such as lap swim, water aerobics, or swim lessons rated 12th. Recreational trends indicate that aquatic recreation such as kayaking, paddle boats, fishing in ponds or a lake, and aquatic play, such as water slides, wave pool, lazy river, or spray grounds, could be successful with the best chance for revenue positive or revenue neutral situations. This facility would be best operated by a concessionaire. If operated by the County, this type of facility would require staffing, possibly more than one full time staff to schedule and coordinate activities, and enough part time staff to cover activities. Local market research indicates that seven water-parks and/or aquatic centers already exist within a 30 mile drive of Prado Regional Park. Based on the existing inventory of water-parks and/or aquatic centers in the market area, the recommendation is that Prado Regional Parkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s aquatic facilities be different and emphasize the unique attributes of the park. It is recommended that if this facility is operated by a concessionaire, a long-term lease agreement should be in place, and the concessionaire be required to submit a five-year business plan. Boy Scouts of America canoe at Glen Helen Regional Park

Person fishing at Prado Regional Park

Paddle boats available at Irvine Regional Park

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 109

4.6.3 Soccer Complex This facility ranked 23rd and 25th out of 27 activities in the user survey. Significant marketing and sales will be required to utilize a facility of this magnitude to its full potential. The cost for this capital improvement and the concern regarding return on investment should be noted by the County. Collecting enough revenue to recoup the initial investment in these types of facilities is typically quite difficult. Organizations typically balk at paying actual costs for field usage. If the complex is privately developed and maintained, it does represent a good use for the land and will generate revenue for the county, depending on the negotiations of the deal. However, if capital investment or maintenance and utility expenses are assumed by the County, then it is not likely to result in any direct or indirect revenue for the park. Demographics and recreational trends support the continued growth of soccer in the area. The additional amenities at the park would provide additional activities for families to participate in while at the park for multi-day tournaments and daily practices. If more camping choices were built at the park, especially those where camping could occur without an RV, then families could come to the tournament complex to play sports but also stay overnight at the park or utilize facilities during the day. This would allow the County to capture some of the external revenue that may be associated with a sports complex like this. Generally, hotel room tax and sales taxes are the method for an agency to capture this revenue stream. However, for the County, being able to capture the full overnight investment and daytime user fees would be the best way to build on the synergy of a dynamic and fun filled park. If the land area becomes available where the current golf course is located, this location may be a logical location for a soccer tournament and multi-use field complex. Local market research indicates that more than 70 soccer fields and three soccer arenas already exist within a 20-mile drive of Prado Regional Park. An additional 57 soccer fields already exist within an additional 10-mile drive. Based on the existing inventory of soccer fields and the lack of identified waiting lists for soccer players/teams, the local market area appears to have close to sufficient soccer fields in the area to meet current demand. This facility would be best operated by a concessionaire with a long-term lease agreement/ payment to the County, and the concessionaire be required to submit a five-year business plan. Soccer complexes don’t survive financially solely on weekend tournaments. In order for a sports complex to be successful, the complex needs to maximize rentals for facilities Monday – Thursday with regular practice/rental from local teams within 15 to 30-minute drive times. A sports complex can’t be financially sustainable and bring in enough revenue to cover the costs of maintenance/ operations/capital improvements with Friday – Sunday tournaments and completions alone. It is recommended that a needs assessment survey be conducted with user and stakeholder user groups, as well as a statistically valid survey, and a true feasibility study to determine the feasibility

Silver Lakes Soccer Complex

of a major soccer practice and competition facility. Within the 40-minute radius, there may already be enough soccer fields to meet the demands for weekday practices. Research shows 62 existing fields within a 10-mile drivetime, which would serve over 400 teams, but it is also important to recognize the remainder of park will be a positive synergy for soccer. It is recommended that if the soccer complex was operated by a concessionaire, that the concessionaire submit a five-year business plan. Phasing should be considered in the development of the soccer complex as demand for fields is demonstrated by the concessionaire. This would be confirmed through the maximized use of the fields and the verification of waiting lists of players and teams that can’t be accommodated by other fields.

110 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.6.4 Nature Education Center and Native Gardens Elements associated with this facility ranked as numbers 2, 5, 6, 9 and 18 out of 27 activities in the use survey. Linear recreation, such as walking paths, bike paths, or hiking trails, along with nature exploration, such as bird watching, nature walks, or lookouts, and nature programs for K-12, college students, or environmental groups, rated as the top three scores for activities on the survey. A nature education center would attract school groups, special interest groups, and visitors regularly. Local market research indicates significant population and organizations that would take advantage of a nature education center on an on-going basis. Schools and other organizations could be expected to add visits to this type of facility to their curriculum. A building structure to house displays and exhibits, and hold educational sessions, along with a trail system with interpretive signage with small outdoor seating areas for educational sessions, would be key elements for a nature education center. The close proximity of a native garden or botanical garden with extensive trails would also be very popular. This facility would require staffing, possibly one full time staff to schedule and coordinate activities, and enough part time staff to cover activities, possibly supplemented by volunteers.It is recommended that the County charge a small fee to schools and special interest groups requesting educational sessions.

Robinson Nature Center

4.6.5 Agricultural Education Center and Museum Elements associated with this facility ranked as numbers 4, 7 and 10 out of 27 activities in the use survey. Agricultural activities, such as corn mazes, community gardens, or farmerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s market, rated ninth for activities on the survey. An agricultural education center and museum should attract school groups, special interest groups, and visitors regularly. Local market research indicates significant population and organizations that would take advantage of an nature education center on an on-going basis. Schools and other organizations could be expected to add visits to this type of facility to their curriculum. A building structure to house displays and exhibits, and hold educational sessions, along with land for growing agricultural for demonstration, would be key elements for an agricultural education center. This facility could share staffing with the nature education center. It is recommended that the County charge a small fee to schools and special interest groups requesting educational sessions. The County has discussed the potential of this amenity being located off-site at the Yorba-Slaughter Adobe House which is near the west edge of the park.

Deanna Rose Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Farmstead

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 111

4.6.6 Equestrian Center This facility received a ranking of 16 out of 27 ranked activities. During stakeholder interviews with the concessionaire, requests for improved and/or new facilities was received. The concessionaire indicated a slight willingness to pay increased fees for improved facilities and amenities. Recreational trends indicate that equestrian activities have a small but consistent presence in the area, with not a lot of expected growth of participants. This facility is best operated by a concessionaire with a long-term lease agreement, along with a minimal payment plus a percentage of the gross revenue. It is recommended that this facility be operated by a concessionaire with a long-term lease agreement along with a minimal payment plus a percentage of the gross revenue, and that the concessionaire submit a five-year business plan.

4.6.7 Adventure Park Elements associated with this facility ranked as numbers 10, 13, 15 and 26 out of 27 in the user survey. Recreational trends indicate that adventure centers could be successful with the best chance for revenue positive or revenue neutral situations. This facility, combined with access to the other features of Prado Regional Park, would be attractive to both campers and users of the other areas of the park looking for activities.

Equestrian Center in Silver Lakes

Local market research indicates a shortage of adventure type facilities. Prado Regional Park is uniquely positioned to develop an adventure park featuring the uniqueness of the area in which the park exists. Additionally, an adventure facility will add synergy to the other amenities in the park. It would also be easily themed with nature, adventure and could also build on its agricultural roots. This facility would be best operated by a concessionaire. If operated by the County, this type of facility would require staffing, possibly more than one full-time staff person to schedule and coordinate reservations and activities, and enough part time staff to cover supervision of the facility. This facility could potentially attract groups such as Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, youth groups, corporate groups, and church groups looking for activities and experiences. This facility could also benefit from the existing adventure events that already occur in the park. It is recommended that if this facility is operated by a concessionaire, a long-term lease agreement should be in place, with a minimal payment plus a percentage of the gross revenue and that the concessionaire be required to submit a five-year business plan. Outdoor challenge course

112 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

4.6.8 Archery and Rifle Tournament Center This activity was ranked 19th out of 27 actives as determined by user input. Capital improvements are needed for this facility. A concern exists regarding return on investment may not be financial feasibility for this facility compared to the needed capital improvements. During stakeholder interviews with the concessionaire, requests for improved and/or new facilities were received. The concessionaire indicated a slight willingness to pay increased fees for improved facilities and amenities. Recreational trends indicate that archery, rifle, and skeet shooting activities have a consistent presence in the area, with some potential for expected growth of participants. Local market research indicates a continued need for this type of facility. Sufficient interest appears to exist in the local area to provide continued support for this facility. This facility is best operated by a concessionaire with a long-term lease agreement. It is recommended that if this facility is operated by a concessionaire, a long-term lease agreement should be in place, and that the concessionaire be required to submit a five-year business plan.

4.6.9 Special Events Area Elements associated with this area ranked 12th and 27th out of 27 in the user survey.

Archery range

Recreational trends indicate that special events, adventure activities, and social events could be successful with the best chance for revenue positive or revenue neutral situations. This facility, combined with access to the other features of Prado Regional Park, would be attractive to both campers and users of the other areas of the park looking for activities. Local market research indicates a shortage of special event venues. Prado Regional Park is uniquely positioned to develop a special event area to compliment the other amenities being considered for the park. A special events area will help promote all of the other areas of the park, exposing large numbers of participants to the park. This facility would be best operated by the County. This type of facility would require staffing, possibly more than one full time person to schedule and coordinate reservations and activities, and enough part time staff to cover supervision of the facility. Significant marketing and sales will be required to utilize a facility of this magnitude to its full potential. This facility could potentially attract national organizations such as spartan runs, mud runs, or ninja warrior challenges, as well as groups such as Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, youth groups, corporate groups and church groups looking for activities and experiences. Unique Special Event Venue

Chapter 4: Park Users, Use Levels, and Market Demand | 113

4.6.10 Linear Recreation This is the highest ranked facility and use out of the 27 choices. Linear recreation, such as walking paths, bike paths, or hiking trails, rated as the top score for activities on the survey. The other features listed above have traditionally rated as highly desired on surveys and in recreational trends. While these amenities are not activity specific, they are key elements to the overall plan. All other miscellaneous amenities, in order of ranking, that do not fit into activity groups but would be distributed around the park, include improved shade such as shelters and trees, continuous sidewalks throughout the park, additional restrooms, lighting for evening use, drinking fountains, wayfinding signage, and increased parking. While these amenities are not activity specific, they are key elements to the overall plan and should all be considered as amenities to add to Prado Regional Park.

Mountain biking trails

Multi-purpose path along lakeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perimeter

Fitness stations along walking paths

114 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Footnotes 1. University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, County Health Rankings 2019, http://www.Countyhealthrankings.org 2. “2018 Sport Participation Snapshot,” National Sporting Goods Association, 2018. 3. Katie DeMuro, “The Many Benefits of Community Gardens” Greenleaf Communities, https:// greenleafcommunities.org/the-many-benefits-of-community-gardens, accessed January 2019 4. Laurie Harmon and Laurel Harrington, “Building a Community Garden in Your Park: Opportunities for Health, Community, and Recreation.” National Recreation and Park Association, https://www.nrpa.org/uploadedFiles/nrpa.org/Grants_and_Partners/Environmental_ Conservation/Community-Garden-Handbook.pdf, accessed January 2019 5. NRPA, “NRPA Report: Park and Recreation Sustainability Practices,”2017. https://www.nrpa.org/ our-work/Three-Pillars/conservation/climate-resilient-parks/ 6. Joe Bush, “Tour-Legged-Friendly Parks, Recreation Management, February 2, 2016. 7. Emily Tipping, “2014 State of the Industry Report, Trends in Parks and Recreation,” Recreation Management, June 2014. 8. Dawn Klingensmith “Gone to the Dogs: Design and Manage an Effective Off-Leash Area”, Recreation Management, March 2014. (http://recmanagement.com/feature_print. php?fid=201403fe02). 9. Nowak, David J., “Benefits of Community Trees,” Brooklyn Trees, USDA Forest Service General Technical Report 10. Outdoor Recreation Participation Report 2016 11. Paul M. Sherer, “The Benefits of Parks: Why America Needs More City Parks and Open Space,” The Trust for Public Land, San Francisco, CA, 2006 12. Physical Activity Council, 2012 Participation Report, 2012. 13. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/24/baby-boomers-us-labor-force/ 14. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/07/6-new-findings-about-millennials/ 15. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/12/a-growing-number-of-americanteenagers-particularly-girls-are-facing-depression/ 16. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/18/americans-60-and-older-are-spendingmore-time-in-front-of-their-screens-than-a-decade-ago/ 17. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/11/15/early-benchmarks-show-post-millennials-ontrack-to-be-most-diverse-best-educated-generation-yet 18. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/07/6-new-findings-about-millennials/ 19. The First Tee, 2018, https://thefirsttee.org/about/ 20. https://www.nrpa.org/parks-recreation-magazine/2019/february/ the-digital-transformation-of-parks-and-rec/ 21. American College of Sports Medicine, “Survey Predicts Top 20 Fitness Trends for 2015”, http:// www.acsm.org/about-acsm/media-room/news-releases/2014/10/24/survey-predicts-top-20fitness-trends-for-2015, accessed January 2015.

22. Liz Szabo, “Shade: A weapon against skin cancer, childhood obesity”, USA Today, June 30, 2011, www.usatoday.30.usatoday.com/news/health/wellness/story/2011/06/Shade-serves-as-a – weapon-against-skin-cancer-childhood-obesity/48965070/1, accessed May 2015 23. “Guide to Community Preventive Services” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html 24. “Health Community: What you should know about trail building,” National Trails Training Partnership: Health and Fitness, http://www.americantrails.org/resources/health/ healthcombuild.html, accessed 2019. 25. Hope Nardini, “Bike Tourism a Rising Trend,” Ethic Traveler, http://www.ethicaltraveler. org/2012/08/bike-tourism-a-rising-trend/, accessed March 2014 26. Michelle Baran, “New Trend: Urban Bike Tours in Los Angeles and New York,” Budget Travel Blog, http://www.budgettravel.com/blog/new-trend-urban-bike-tours-in-los-angeles-and-newyork,11772/, accessed March 2014 27. Steven Pease, “Fat Bikes, How to Get the Most Out of Winter Cycling,” Minnesota Cycling Examiner, http://www.examiner.com/article/fat-bikes-the-latest-trend-adventure-cycling, February 1, 2014. 28. “E-bikes on Open Space,” Boulder County, https://www.bouldercounty.org/open-space/ management/e-bikes/, Accessed December 28, 2018 29. Penbrooke, T.L. (2017). Local parks and recreation agencies use of systems thinking to address preventive public health factors. (Doctoral Dissertation). North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. Retrieved from: http://www.gpred.org/resources/ under PhD Dissertations. 30. Paul M. Sherer, “The Benefits of Parks: Why America Needs More City Parks and Open Space,” The Trust for Public Land, San Francisco, CA, 2006 31. “2018 Disc Golf Demographics,” Professional Disc Golf Association. Accessed October 2019. 32. Linton Weeks, “FootGolf: A New Sport Explored in 19 Questions,” NPR: https://www.npr.org/ sections/theprotojournalist/2014/03/13/288546935/footgolf-a-new-sport-explored-in-19questions, March 13, 2014 33. “Alternative Golf Experiences,” World Golf Foundation: http://ngcoa.org/ewebeditpro5/upload/ AGEReport_12.15.pdf, December 2015. 34. “U.S. Road Race Participation Numbers Hold Steady for 2017,” Running USA, https:// runningusa.org/RUSA/News/2018/U.S._Road_Race_Participation_Numbers_Hold_Steady_ for_2017.aspx, Accessed October 2019. 35. Steven Pease, “Fat Bikes, How to Get the Most Out of Winter Cycling,” Minnesota Cycling Examiner, http://www.examiner.com/article/fat-bikes-the-latest-trend-adventure-cycling, February 1, 2014.

Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis

116 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5 Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis 5.1 Site Analysis Overview There is diversity in both natural and man-made existing features within the park. Certain factors represent challenges, that could be used to preserve portions of the park that are natural areas, while others are opportunities for future development within the park for new recreational activities. Thinking through these opportunities and challenges will help to generate potential design solutions. In reviewing the site as a whole, there are specific factors that are obvious without detailed mapping analysis, while others are not as obvious and can only be uncovered through overlay GIS analysis. The park has many barriers that prevent trails, roadway access and gates to be located in a logical & connected pattern. These barriers include Euclid Avenue, Pine Avenue, Chino Creek, East-side Creek, the gun and archery ranges, the 71 Freeway & Prado Pond. The final master plan should address Euclid as a barrier. The barrier could be address by adding a trail bridge, round-abouts, signals, or even consider the development of Euclid as a future bridge itself. Connecting trails and paths to the existing tunnel under the 71 would result in connected open space for recreational purposes.

The basin that the park sits within, Prado Basin, is designed to flood with most of Prado Regional Park under some level of flooding potential. The flooding that typically occurs on site is a slow rise and not torrential erosive waters. However, any flooding will still damage buildings and other infrastructure. Proposed facilities should be placed on the highest ground possible. One opportunity that offsets these constraints is the ability to increase fill in certain areas to raise the ground out of the floodplain. However, based on the Corps of Engineers policies, an equal amount of the basin would need to be lowered so as not to decrease the reservoir holding capacity. These lowered areas could be used to increase habitat areas that are more self sustaining, while at the same time help to balance cut and fill for grading operations. Another important challenge for the park to consider is that the 270 acres of the Proposition 70 land is currently isolated from the west side of the existing park. It is very important to provide connectivity across the entire site so that it is functioning and feels like one regional park. By connecting areas with the rebuilding of McCarty Road and the construction of a bridge, the two sides of the park could become fully connected. It can also be connected with trails and paths, but all will need to bridge over the where old bridge along McCarty Road was washed out a number of years ago.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 117

Another major opportunity for the park would be to entice the 2028 Olympic Committee to reuse the old 1984 Olympic Archery and Skeet Range venues north of Euclid and South of Pine Avenue. There is the potential for the archery and gun ranges to become an international tournament site even if the Olympics are not coaxed here. However, since this area floods, major capital improvements would be required to accommodate this type of activity. The final plan should address the possible flooding problem at this site and either raise this site (and lowering other areas) or move a new venue to the south side of Euclid where the current hunting dog training area is. Through stakeholder meetings and workshops, a performing arts center was identified as a potential program. When considering this activity, it is important to analyze the additional traffic or noise that could possibly be generated. The natural topography of the site offers opportunities for the performing arts center to be located on high ground with views of the distant valley and adjacent mountains. By locating the performing arts center on higher ground in the middle of the park, traffic could be addressed by providing additional entry gates at various locations. To address the noise issue, landforms or other buffers will be needed to assure that noise propagation towards existing or future residential areas do not occur.

One factor to keep in mind is that all activities in the park will either be subject to gate fees or a user fee. Because of the layout and size of the park, future uses will be too spread out to be accommodated by just one gate. Additional gates will require additional staffing. In order to manage this additional cost, some gates could be established strictly of for special events, some would be controlled by electronic card readers, and some might not be required if the entire area has a user fee at the destination and can be collected by a concessionaire. Much of the site has been disturbed but has the potential to be restored to more natural areas or for better uses than the current underutilized areas. All disturbed and underutilized lands should either be converted to lower elevations and made into habitat or natural areas or used for passive or active recreation depending on location. Additional excess lands could be used for agricultural leases. The park does not currently have a critical mass of activities or amenities to encourage a high level of use. This is a challenge when it comes to making the park financially successful and having the ability to invest in new facilities, maintenance and upgrades. Activities that encourage longer stays such as camping, weekday uses such as school interpretive programs and special events that introduce attendees to the park should be considered. When someone visits the park for a special event or a particular activity, they need to see other activities and interesting areas so that they will be encouraged to come back and utilize the facilities on non-event days. This is a good technique for building a customer base and the park should continue to support special events that bring larger numbers to the park. But to convince them to come back, more amenities and fun things to do should be added so that the park can self-generate new customers and increased customer use of the park. These big picture opportunities discussed above and the need to discover the constraints and assets of the park, are the basis for the extensive amount of mapping and analysis done in this Chapter.

118 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.2 GIS Modeling Process: COLA The acronym COLA stands for Constraints, Opportunities, Liabilities, and Assets. These four topics help to explain the siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s existing conditions and help to focus uses of the park in the appropriate areas. In order to analyze COLA, Graphic Information System Mapping (GIS) is utilized as a tool that allows a variety of the existing conditions discussed in Chapter 2 to be overlaid on top of each other. This overlay process provides outputs of areas throughout the park that should either be avoided or are ideal for development based on a variety of factors. The GIS simply overlays the various layers of conditions and adds or subtracts from the other layers, which ends up as an overall score, that is then further categorized into one of several conditions. These conditions are on a gradient and represent the worst and best areas for park development. Ultimately everything is combined into one map and results in a heat map where constraints are highlighted in red and opportunities in green. The diagram below shows how individual maps shown in the existing conditions chapter, combine to create composite maps that are in turn, also added together with other maps. Eventually, an Opportunity and Constraint map can then be produced.

5.3 Constraints Constraints are features or conditions that cannot be changed with planning or design and that need to be addressed to reduce their potential problems.

5.3.1 Biological sensitivity Biological sensitivity relates to natural features that can not be modified or changed. This analysis considers the sensitivity of the existing habitat, the wetland potential, and the locations of sensitive species. The design should look at preserving and protecting areas of high biological sensitivity. In addition, these areas have the potential to provide educational opportunities when they are located adjacent to an area that might be more suitable for development of trails or paths.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 119

Development Suitability based on Biological Sensitivity Low opportunity No constraint Low constraint Moderate constraint High constraint

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 5-1: Biological Sensitivity

Text

120 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.3.2 Areas of previous investments Areas of previous investments incorporate man-made features including existing buildings, existing lease and land uses, existing easements and rights of ways, and all the existing cultural resources. The majority of the park does not have too many structures. There are several existing leases that do contain structures and other buildings. Given these investments, they generally are not thought of as areas where new uses should be planned. Investments should not be wiped out in order to provide land area for new park development, unless the condition of the facilities are so inferior, that they need to be rebuilt anyway. All of these man-made constraint elements have been overlaid resulting in only minor areas of high constraints based on previous investments.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 121

Development Suitability based on Previous Investment Low opportunity No opportunity or constraint Low constraint Moderate constraint High constraint Very high constraint

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 5-2: Areas of Previous Investments

Text

122 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.4 Opportunities Opportunities are elements that have the potential to be realized if additional resources are added to the site. A site ability to absorb or accommodate new uses is often referred to as suitability. An example of suitability can come from factors like constructibility of new park roads, structures or amenities. In the case discussed below, the suitability of soils for grading, agriculture, or for building a foundation or a road on, are considered to be important factors to consider. In this section two factors have been considered as opportunities and include soil suitability and levels of disturbance.

5.4.1 Soil suitability Soil suitability is a result of the combination of natural features including expansive soil, erodible soil and slope. Most development related to structures and infrastructural should be in locations where the expansiveness and potential for erosion are low. While unique modifications to structures can be made to accommodate slope and grading and compaction options exist to offset expansive soils, these all add to the costs of development. Steeper slopes should generally be avoided due to the cost of grading, however, some park uses, such as a bike skills course can benefit from changes in elevation and slope, most park facilities benefit from level areas, such as sport fields. When you combine all three soil characteristics as overlays, certain areas stand out as potential areas to build on since they do not contain constraints associated with poor soil conditions.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 123

Development Suitability based on Soil Characteristics No Constraint Low constraint Moderate constraint High constraint Very high constraint

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 5-3: Soil Suitability

Text

124 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.4.2 Levels of disturbance The level of disturbance that a site has can represent an opportunity for park development if it has few environmental resources or has not been developed for other park uses. The more disturbed areas have less impacts and allow less site clearing and less environmental mitigations. Heavily disturbed areas in a park setting can often cause soil erosion problems, fuel management issues for fires and are generally a blight on the visual environment. When possible, the development of these areas can actually improve the visual and physical condition of these disturbed areas. This section discusses the areas that are identified as having a higher opportunity for new development based on the level of disturbance. Areas on the map were derived from aerial photographic interpretation of soil cover, vegetation cover and various levels of use or abandonment. This mapping was also used to determine undisturbed natural areas and open spaces. Land use mapping and land cover such as asphalt, concrete, turf, native vegetation and non-native ruderal vegetation was also used to determine the level of disturbance.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 125

Development Suitability based on Levels of Disturbance Moderate opportunity Low opportunity No constraint or opportunity Low constraint Moderate constraint High constraint Very high constraint

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 5-4: Levels of Disturbance

Text

126 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.5 Liabilities Liabilities are features or conditions that are problems that can and should be addressed with planning solutions. If they are not addressed, they often result in new problems and damage to the natural and built environments. The major factors used in this section relate to flooding potential. Flooding can not easily be managed, especially considering the nature of the Prado Dam and Basin is to retain water and allow it to percolate into the groundwater aquifer system. As such, the dam is not often open to allow for flood waters to drain out. In addition, the most recent Feasibility Study completed by the Army Corps of Engineers, indicates the park should expect longer periods of flooding. This type of flooding, however, is not that erosive or powerful for creating problems like normal flooding of creeks and rivers. The movement of the flowing water is very low since it results from the backing up of water and not the additional flow of erosive and large volumes of moving water. Flooding over turf areas, agricultural areas and open space is not very damaging at all. Campgrounds are generally in need of closing and customers will have to move, but the resulting flood in some cases is good for the soil and the silt rebuilds soil. However, a flooded building or flooded playgrounds can result in damage.

5.5.1 Hydrologic suitability Hydrologic suitability overlays slope, inundation levels, and FEMA flood levels. Any areas that have a flooding problem, are ideal to be preserved as natural habitat or natural features, where as development of structures should be avoided.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 127

Development Suitability based on Hydrologic Conditions High opportunity Medium opportunity Slight opportunity Low constraint Moderate constraint High constraint

Ch in o Cr ee k

e Cr

Prado Lake

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 5-5: Hydrologic Suitability

Text

128 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.6 Assets Assets are items found on site that either should be protected as-is or enhanced in some manner. They represent some level of previous investment of money or time (in the case of mature vegetation). They are also factors that can be added onto or in the case of infrastructure, can be connected to with roads or circulation elements or plugged into like utilities and security systems.

5.6.1 Proximity to existing improvements This section represents overlay maps that include man-made features such as existing buildings, utilities, park entries, roads, and parking. Any new development that can be located near or adjacent to these existing improvements can reduce the need to expand the infrastructure since capacity increase or extensions can be minimal. In addition, the re-utilization or re-purposing of these features as opposed to new development can potentially help reduce costs.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 129

Development Suitability based on Proximity to Existing Improvements High opportunity Moderate opportunity Low opportunity No opportunity or constraint

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 5-6: Proximity to Existing Improvements

Text

130 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Prado Regional Park’s proposed development will include the expansion of existing facilities and the development of unused land into multiple types of facilities. The park’s planned development will require a large amount of additional sewer and water demand. To determine capacity and feasibility for the existing utility systems and facilities to handle the additional demand, the County of San Bernardino will need to coordinate with the IEUA and local municipalities. IEUA and local municipalities will understand the existing system’s capacity and will also know of any additional volumes from the current and planned developments of the surrounding areas. Technical studies, including a sewer and water capacity study, will need to be performed to understand the ability of existing improvements to accommodate the additional demand generated by proposed developments. Existing utilities, facilities, and roadways serve the park and are an integral part of future expansion. A full existing traffic conditions study can be found in the appendix. Table 5-1 summarizes utilities, facilities, and roadway Improvements. Table 5-1: Existing Improvements Summary Existing Utilities Type

Sanitary Sewer Water Stormwater Brine Line Electrical Existing Facilities Type

Description

An existing sanitary sewer system is in use for the current facilities available within the park boundary. The system is in the central portion of the park where park activity is concentrated in the campground and active play areas. An existing water system is in use for the current facilities. Like the sanitary system, the water system is in the central portion of the park where activity is concentrated in the campground and active play areas. Limited storm drain facilities exist within the park. The lake provides for retention and the spillway at the bottom is used to control the drainage of water. Culverts are used to direct flows of water under the roadways and into the lake. These are in the middle of the park. New facilities would need to be constructed in the undeveloped areas of the park. A 36-inch brine line starts near the intersection of Euclid Avenue and Pomona Rincon Road and generally travels southeast toward Orange County. The gravity pipeline delivers non-reclaimable waste from the Santa Ana River Watershed to a treatment plant in Orange County operated by the Orange County Sanitation District. Southern California Edison (SCE) provides electricity to the region and to the local area. Regional transmission lines travel a corridor roughly parallel to Pine Avenue. The corridor crosses through Prado Regional Park in the airspace above the existing golf course. SCE delivers electrical service to the centrally located developed portion of the park that passes by the existing campground and the north side of Prado Lake. Description

Sewer Lift Station This regional lift station used to transport sewer flows to the IEUA regional treatment facilities. It is located along the northern border of the park boundary. Inland Empire Utilities Agency’s (IEUA) This plant works in conjunction with additional IEUA facilities to serve the Cities of Chino, Chino Hills, Montclair, and Upland. - Regional Water Recycling Plant No. 2 Two plugged wells are in the western portion of the park. One is west of Pomona Rincon Road, west of the terminus of Pine Avenue. The other is located Oil and Gas Wells near the shooting range west of Euclid Avenue.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 131

Existing Roadways Type

Euclid Avenue Pine Avenue Pomona Rincon Avenue Johnson Avenue Chino Corona Avenue Cucamonga Avenue McCarty Road Hellman Avenue

Description

Euclid Avenue is an expressway under the City of Chino general plan. Currently the road varies between two- and four-lanes undivided and provides access to the main area of the park, which includes the campgrounds, lake, and active recreational areas. Euclid Avenue also provides access to the shooting and archery ranges and the dog training facility. In the future, Euclid Avenue will continue to provide access to these areas. Pine Avenue is a primary arterial west of Euclid Avenue and a major arterial east of Euclid Avenue. It currently varies between two- and four-lanes undivided and provides access to the El Prado Golf Course. Pine Avenue is anticipated to provide access to the sports fields in the future. Pomona Rincon Avenue is a local road not designated on the City of Chino general plan. Currently, it is a two-lane undivided road providing access to the gun and archery ranges as well as the dog training facility. In the future, Pomona Rincon Avenue will continue to provide access to these areas. Johnson Avenue is a local road not designated in the City of Chino general plan. It is a two-lane undivided road currently providing access to the equestrian area. Johnson Avenue will continue to provide access to these areas and is anticipated to provide future access to active park and sports areas. Chino Corona Avenue is an urban residential collector. Currently, it is a two-lane undivided roadway that provides access to the model airplane lease area. In the future, Chino Corona Avenue is anticipated to provide access to the south-central portion of the park, including a special event area and community performing arts center, new camping and activity areas, and a nature center in the future. Cucamonga Avenue is a local street not designated under the City of Chino general plan. It is a two-lane undivided roadway that currently provides access to the model airplane runway. In the future, it will provide access to the south-central portion of the park which is planned to include, new campgrounds, activity areas, and a nature center. McCarty Road is a local road not designated under the City of Chino general plan. It is a two-lane partially unpaved road currently providing access to the model airplane runway and paint ball range. In the future, it will support circulation through the eastern portion of the park which includes the existing paint ball park, active park and sports, an aquatic center and more. Hellman Avenue is a primary arterial. It is a two-lane undivided road providing access to the existing paint ball park. In the future, Hellman Avenue is anticipated to provide access to eastern portion of the park which including an agricultural fun farm, an aquatic center, bike/pump track activities, a ropes course/skate park, and an expansion of the paint ball park.

132 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.7 GIS Modeling Results The mapping analysis started with identifying all of the existing conditions on site which were described in Chapter 2. Using these maps, the first tier of analysis started to identify different levels of suitability for development as described earlier in this chapter. The next tier of overlay maps identifies development suitability based on a composite of natural elements and man-made elements. The third and final tier of analysis consists of an opportunities and constraints summary that combines all of the man-made and natural elements combined into one map.

5.7.1 Development Suitability Based on Natural Elements Development suitability based on natural elements were created by overlaying biological sensitivity, Hydrologic suitability, soil sensitivity, and levels of disturbance. This results in a range of areas that represent moderate opportunities for park development down to very high constraints to park development. The map on the next page indicates the areas around the creek that have the most constraints for development.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 133

Development Suitability based on Natural Elements Moderate opportunity Low opportunity No constraint or opportunity Low constraint Moderate constraint High constraint Very high constraint

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 5-7: Development Suitability Based on Natural Elements

Text

134 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.7.2 Development Suitability Based on Man-Made Elements Park development suitability was created by overlaying man-made features as well overlaying distance zones that defined the ability to connect easily with existing improvements. This was based on proximity to existing infrastructure and other areas of previous investments. The highest opportunities for park development based on these two factors are on the Proposition 70 land as well as in several locations in the developed portions of the park.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 135

Development Suitability based on Manmade Elements High opportunity Moderate opportunity Low opportunity No constraint or opportunity Low constraint Moderate constraint High constraint

Ch in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 5-8: Development Suitability Based on Man-Made Element

Text

136 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.7.3 Opportunities and Constraints Summary All of the previous maps were combined in GIS to create a final opportunities and constraints map shown on the following page. Once all these maps were combined, the results help to focus the areas for potential park investments and development opportunities with greater accuracy. Using this final data, different alternatives can start to be developed. Areas that are highly sensitive have the potential to become natural areas or habitat, while other ares are identified as the best location for new park development.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 137

Park Development Suitability based on Natural and Manmade Elements Best location for new park High opportunity Moderate opportunity Low opportunity Neutral (slight opportunities or Very low constraint Low constraint Moderate constraint High constraint Ch

Worst location for new park

in o Cr ee k

g on

Prado Lake

I 0

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 5-9: Opportunities and Constraints Summary

Text

138 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.8 Environmental Sensitivity & Appropriate Uses Consideration should be given to different levels of facility investments and intensity of recreations as it relates to their location based on flooding potential and environmental sensitivity. Areas with high sensitivity and high flooding potential should be utilized for conservation and habitat. As the flooding and sensitivity is reduced the levels of facility investment and intensity can be increased. This concept is demonstrated in Table 5-2. Potential programs for Prado Regional Park have been identified on the matrix and laid out to identify where they fall as risk is reduced and investment is increased.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 139

BEST LOCATIONS FOR EACH USE UNDER THE SUGGESTED “BALANCED FRAMEWORK PLAN” RECREATIONAL INTENSITY

Restroom Buildings / Community Rooms

Entertainment Venue

Equestrian Performance Venue

Spraygrounds / Water Features

Agricultural Education Center

Community Garden

Sports Tournament Court / Field Facilities

Golf Course

Special Camping Event

Family Camping Units

Primitive Tent Camping

Bike Skills Course / BMX / Skate Park

Shooting Range

Docks, Launch Ramps for Boating Rentals

Recreational Vehicle Camping

Agricultural Uses

Archery Range

Par Course & Outdoor Exercise Equipment

General Landscaped / Multi-use Open Fields

Native Botanical Gardens

General Purpose Multiuse Fields

Equestrian Center

Adventure Playgrounds

Outdoor Lab, Shelters & Small Group Seating

Upland Habitat Restoration

General Playgrounds

General Camp Center Market

Obstacle Course / High Ropes Course

Bird Watching Blinds

Bio-swales, Ponds Infiltration Basins

General Purpose Court Sports

Frisbee Course

Paved Biking / Walking Trail

Interpretive Signage / Kiosks

Open Freshwater Habitat Areas

Group Picnic Areas

Dog Park / Dog Training Area

Equestrian Trails

Orienteering Course / Geocaching

Upland Habitats for Mitigation

Picnic Areas

Mountain Biking / Cyclo Cross Trails

Cross Country Running Trails

Hiking Trail Systems

Wetland Habitats for Mitigations

MEDIUM

ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY Table 5-2: Recreation Matrix

HIGH

1. Special Event Active Recreation Area Requires parking, access and resilient areas with no nearby noise sensitivity and away from flooding since these are high investment facilities 2 .General Active Recreation Area Requires relatively level areas, close to parking, roads, utilities and above inundation levels and generally away from sensitive natural areas

FLOOD POTENTIAL

Extreme Sport Event Facilities / Paint ball Park

LOW

Legend for a “Balanced Framework Plan”

Nature Education Center

LOW

Food Court / Preparation Areas

MEDIUM

HIGH MEDIUM LOW

LOW

Shooting Range / Archery Competition Venue

Water Park

FACILITY INVESTMENT

MEDIUM

3. Single Purpose Lease Area Definable property, controlled space, limited environmental sensitivities, near other activities (except ranges / dog training) and high visibility 4. Low Impact Passive Open Space Can be inundated, can be remote, should have natural land forms and be vegetated and should only allow low intensity uses or user levels 5. Limited Access Conservation Area Non- sensitive animal / plant species that are not disturbed by reasonable noise levels or limited human presence

HIGH

6. No Access Conservation Area No human use or access allowed due to environmental sensitive wetland areas with high flooding potential and sensitive habitats

140 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.9 Fire and Emergency Exits Fires are a concern for southern California landscapes as hot temperatures, little to no rain, and Santa Anna winds occur during the summer and fall months. Fire spread is determined by fuel loading, fuel conditions in terms of flammability, wind, slope and landforms that can direct and concentrate fire. Fuels can also be classified as flash fuels that burn fast but not hot and heavy fuels that burn slow but can generate high degrees of heat. Hot fires can build on their own intensity and, when coupled with winds and steep slopes or landforms that funnel heat upward, they can move very fast and create extensive amounts of damage. Prado does have a fair amount of fuel loading in terms of the extensive riparian and eucalyptus trees and shrubs that exist in the center part of the site. These fuels are generally kept moist and do not have a high degree of flammability. The agricultural lease areas and other open space generally have flash fuels as certain times of the year that can burn quickly and could lead up to the heavier fuels of the riparian and eucalyptus landscape zones. Flash fuels can start up easily and with wind, can move quickly. Recreational facilities that include landscaped and turfed areas that are regularly irrigated, can actually work as fire breaks.

Fires and emergency exists should be considered in the overall master plan for Prado Regional Park. Slope, vegetation type, and winds, all play a critical part in determining the intensity and speed of fires as they occur. Steeper slopes are more vulnerable to the spread of fire than flatter areas are. As flames rise and catch the vegetation on higher slopes they are able to spread uphill. Dry or oily vegetation and fast fuel such as grasslands and Eucalyptus trees can contribute to hotter, faster fires as well. For public safety purposes, a park such as Prado should have several directions that can be used for evacuation. Multiple gates and roadways are needed to evacuate the area if an oncoming fire is likely. Generally it is best to have these areas move people in different directions, given the direction of the roads and associated arterials that they hook up with. For the most part, the site utilized the main gate at Euclid. The dog training area and the archery range, shooting range and golf course generally only have one direction and one gate or location to leave through. All parts of the park would greatly benefit by the addition of more options for directional exits from the park. If a fire were to occur on the park site, there are limited exits available to individuals within the park. The main gate at Euclid Avenue and Johnson Road provide exits to the north from the main park site. The exits to the east and south are more limited. Natural, existing fire breaks do exists within the park including the creeks and low lying areas when water is present, including the existing Prado Pond. As the park develops, additional exits, roadways and fire breaks should be considered. Refuges are also needed in case visitors get trapped. The pond and turf areas do provide a safe refuge for park visitors that are prevented from evacuating.

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 141

5.10

Circulation Opportunities

Vehicular access to Prado Regional Park is provided by a network of regional and local roadways. Park access driveways are provided along State Route 83 (SR-83, Euclid Avenue), Pine Avenue, and Pomona Rincon Road. Johnson Avenue also offers park access near the equestrian center. SR-71, which has a partial cloverleaf interchange with Euclid Avenue, provides regional access to the area. Other existing roadways offer the potential for new access points. Those roadways include Chino Corona Avenue, Cucamonga Avenue, Hellman Avenue, and McCarty Road.

5.10.1 Roadway expansions or improvements The area near Prado Regional Park has experienced new and changing development in recent years and development is expected to continue and have a direct impact on the local transportation system. Once a potential development is approved and ready for construction, the development is responsible for upgrading the half-width section of roadway adjacent to its property to be consistent with the City of Chino General Plan. Figure 5-10 identifies currently planned or proposed development in the area and the areas where these developments are anticipated to improve their property frontage. Figure 5-11 identifies the currently remaining transportation gaps in the network, and thus the roadway segments and intersections which may require improvement but where responsibility for funding has not yet been determined. It is worth noting that the developments and improvement areas identified involve applications which are in progress and under review. The status of these developments may change over time and new developments may also be proposed prior to implementation of the Master Plan. The status of these developments may change over time and new developments may also be proposed prior to implementation of the Master Plan.

142 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Table 5-3: Future Roadway Improvements and Developments Map Proposed Development ID

Edgewater Communities

Description

1,074 Units, Retail, School, Open Space

Property Adjacent Roadway(s)

City of Chino General Plan Classification

Cucamonga Rd

Local Street, 2-lane undivided roadway (60’ R/W) Urban Residential Collector, 2-lane undivided roadway with on-street parking (60’ R/W) Urban Residential Collector Major Arterial, 6-lane divided roadway with raised median and bike lanes (120’ R/W) Urban Residential Collector Urban Residential Collector Urban Residential Collector Urban Residential Collector Urban Residential Collector Primary Arterial, 4-lane divided roadway with raised median and bike lanes (98’ R/W) Urban Residential Collector Urban Residential Collector Urban Residential Collector

Chino Corona Rd E County Rd Pine Ave

Falloncrest at the Preserve

9,779 Units, 10,238,744 sf Non-Residential

Lot 14 and 15 Preserve

272 Condominiums

W Preserve Loop E Preserve Loop Bickmore Ave E Preserve Loop Main St Hellman Ave

Harvest at Preserve

600 Dwelling Units

Bouma

106 Detached Units, 94 Condominiums/ Townhomes

HRB Properties

Potential 450-unit residential

Majestic Chino Heritage

2 Industrial Buildings

Altitude Business Park

25 Buildings, 1,313,000 sf

McBride Self Storage and RV

154,690 sf Self Storage Facility, 930 Stalls RV Storage, 29,650 sf Retail, 4,200 sf Gas Station

Chino Holding Co.

Potential commercial development

Orange County Flood Control District

Potential development

Hellman Ave E Preserve Loop Bickmore Ave Meadowhouse Ave Pine Ave Chino Corona Rd Kimball Ave Bickmore Ave Mayhew Ave Bickmore Ave Mountain Ave

Local Street Major Arterial Urban Residential Collector Primary Arterial Urban Residential Collector Urban Residential Collector Rural Collector, 2-lane undivided roadway with on-street parking (60’ R/W) Rural Collector

Euclid Ave

Expressway, 8-lane divided roadway with raised median (206’ R/W)

Pine Ave Chino Corona Rd Cucamonga Rd Chino Corona Rd

Major Arterial Urban Residential Collector Local Street Urban Residential Collector

Chapter 5: Park Opportunities and Constraints Analysis | 143

SR 71

E E AV

ARCHIBALD AVE

SCHLEISMAN RD

E PINE AV

CHANDLER ST

CHINO CORONA RD

ARCHIBALD AVE

GROVE AVE

EUC

LID

NC RI

AVE

A ON

EY LL VA

RIVER RD

POM

O IN CH

ARCHIBALD AVE

RFIELD R

R IV E R

XPY

0.5

Â°

c Cu

Cr onga

V RI

R CO

Residential

Mixed

AR CH IB AL D

AV E LID

Industrial

R BA

N DR

NYO

Flood Control

R CO

EW VI

IC ST

Commercial

V HO 71

Development Projects

SH A

Half Width Improvements By Others

HR D

RI V E

Chino Creek

Johnson Ave Realignment By Others

V HO

RF IE L

TT E

Planned Improvements

County Boundary

Park Boundary

9/23/2019 JN M:\Mdata\167844\MXD\August 2019\Surrounding Development and Roadway Improvements.mxd

UTT E D B HR

Legend

E AV

EUC

C AN

PINE AVE

E AV

O AD

V HO

IEL RF

RA N

E TT BU

EL D

PINE AV

LID A

V HO

FA IR FI

65TH ST

ARCHIBALD AVE

HELLMAN AVE

EUCLID AVE EUCLID AVE

Y PK

MOUNTAIN AVE

O AD

PI C A

FW EY LL VA O RD IN ON CH NC

AV E

CHINO CORONA RD

V HO

A EL C S OQU

EUCLID AVE

HI G

RB A

PO MO

65TH ST

HELLMAN AVE

RA IL

KIMBALL AVE

PRADO REGIONAL PARK MASTER PLAN

1 Miles

Source: San Bernardino County, ESRI World Imagery

Figure 5-10: Surrounding Development and Roadway Improvements

Surrounding Development and Roadway Improvements

144 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Figure 5-11: Future Required Roadway Improvements

Alternatives Development

146 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

6 Alternatives Development 6.1 Park Land Use Alternatives Based on the opportunities and constraints map and public input, four different alternatives were created to explore different levels of development and land use configurations throughout the park. Most alternatives were formed around different adjacent roadway expansions and what those expansions could mean for making better and safer connections between the various areas of the park. The ranking of these alternatives were discussed in Chapter 3.

Note: All maps, tables and ideas in this Chapter represent the range of thinking for ways of developing Prado Regional Park. They do not represent the recommendations of this Master Plan. They have been included only to document the process and to store the ideas in a place that can be resurrected and brought back, if conditions change in the future and the idea becomes more viable. This is especially true for the off-park circulation ideas for changes in Euclid and Pine Avenue. If these roadway projects do result in increased funding or approval of projects, then their design should be influenced by these alternatives and the opportunities that a bridge structure for these roadways represents for Prado Park internal circulation should be explored further.

6.1.1 Park Land Use Alternative 1 Alternative 1 preserves the current land use configurations for the majority of the areas east of Euclid Avenue including the golf course, the archery range and the gun and shooting ranges. This alternative concentrates the improvements at the existing park around Prado Lake and Proposition 70 lands at the east end of the park. New or enhanced natural areas and habitat are proposed to accommodate Chino Creek that runs across the site from north to south. On Proposition 70 land, the adventure activities are grouped in the south east corner. In addition, the paintball park is reconfigured and expanded to the north. Camping is focused around the south side of the lake. A new swim park is proposed for the area just off of Johnson Avenue with other infill including rentable picnic areas, group picnic areas and an off leash dog area are included within the main part of the park. The majority of the southern part of the park would remain new or existing habitat or natural ares. The dog training area and much of the agricultural lands would remain intact. At the park entry off Cucamonga Avenue, an events area would include a community performing arts center, a community center and community open space.

KEY LEGEND Equestrian and Special Agricultural Uses

Ranges and Training Areas

Agricultural Grounds and Trails

Expanded Paint Ball Park

Agricultural Farm House Museum

Adjusted Paint Ball Park

Equestrian Performance

Existing Archery Park and Range

Equestrian Boarding

Existing Gun and Skeet Range

Nature Center Building

Camping

Nature Center Outdoor Gathering

Traditional RV Campground

Rentable Units for Camping

Semi-Public Leases 7

Dog Training Area

Primitive Tent Camping

Agricultural Lease

General Store

Adventure Activities

Aquatics

Zip Line

Splash Pad

Skate Park

Watercraft Rentals

High Ropes Course / Low Ropes Course

Public Launching Water Park Swimming Pool

Pump Track / Bike Skills Park

Adventure Playground

Obstacle Course

Golf Course 15 Existing Golf Course

Special Event Areas 16

Open Space for Special Events

Rentable Group Picnic Area

Community Performing Arts Center

Community Multi-Use Building or Spaces

Active Sports / Tournament Areas 20

Sports Fields Type 1 and 2

Court Sports

Fields for Semi-Formal Sporting Events

General Passive Park Areas 23

Group Picnic Area

Park Amenity Infill

Leash Free Area

Passive Park and Open Space

Natural Areas and Habitats 41

Natural Area

New or Enhanced Habitat

New or Enhanced Natural Areas

Existing Natural Area

New Natural Area

Chapter 6: Alternatives Development | 147

Ch in

o Cr

43 25 24

15 24

39 22

23 21 36

e Cr

42 31

Prado

34 Lake

1 33

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 6-1: Alternative #1 Park Land Use

28 5 43

8 44

14 10

18 17

13 27

6 7

11 9

148 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

6.1.2 Park Land Use Alternative 2 Alternative 2 encourages new improvements on the east side of the park (Prop. 70 lands) by providing a connecting road and bridge at McCarty Road between Cucamonga and Hellman / River Road. There is a larger area for sports fields in the middle of the park. A skate park and pump track is located east of Cucamonga Avenue and special event spaces are located in this area as well. The nature center and outdoor gathering areas are co-located in the middle of the park near new natural and enhanced habitat and natural areas to enhance educational opportunities. Similar to Alternative 1, the east side of the park remains relatively the same and intact when comparing the existing to proposed land uses. In this alternative, different camping opportunities take advantage of the setting and views next to the lake. Active sports fields are located off Johnson where the equestrian center is currently. On Proposition 70 land, a new swim park and pool is just off Hellman Avenue. The paintball facility is shown to be reconfigured and expanded. All new agricultural education elements are focused on the north side of Proposition 70 land.

KEY LEGEND Equestrian and Special Agricultural Uses

Ranges and Training Areas

Agricultural Grounds and Trails

Expanded Paint Ball Park

Agricultural Farm House Museum

Adjusted Paint Ball Park

Equestrian Performance

Existing Archery Park and Range

Equestrian Boarding

Existing Gun and Skeet Range

Nature Center Building

Camping

Nature Center Outdoor Gathering

Traditional RV Campground

Rentable Units for Camping

Semi-Public Leases 7

Dog Training Area

Primitive Tent Camping

Agricultural Lease

General Store

Adventure Activities

Aquatics

Zip Line

Splash Pad

Skate Park

Watercraft Rentals

High Ropes Course / Low Ropes Course

Public Launching Water Park Swimming Pool

Pump Track / Bike Skills Park

Adventure Playground

Obstacle Course

Golf Course 15 Existing Golf Course

Special Event Areas 16

Open Space for Special Events

Rentable Group Picnic Area

Community Performing Arts Center

Community Multi-Use Building or Spaces

Active Sports / Tournament Areas 20

Sports Fields Type 1 and 2

Court Sports

Fields for Semi-Formal Sporting Events

General Passive Park Areas 23

Group Picnic Area

Park Amenity Infill

Leash Free Area

Passive Park and Open Space

Natural Areas and Habitats 41

Natural Area

New or Enhanced Habitat

New or Enhanced Natural Areas

Existing Natural Area

New Natural Area

Chapter 6: Alternatives Development | 149

24 43

41 31

Prado Lake

0.5 Miles

Figure 6-2: Alternative #2 Park Land Use

19 44

26 44

0.25

26 43

e Cr

150 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

6.1.3 Park Land Use Alternative 3 Prado Regional Park is currently divided in half by Euclid Avenue. Alternative 3 begins to study the theory of linking together both sides of the park by providing a road under Euclid where Euclid would become a bridge structure in the future. This interconnection feasibly allows new development on the east side of the park. A park roadway network could be added to travel under Euclid Avenue where it was adequately raised to be out of the flood plain. This would require ramps to get from and to Euclid Avenue from park roads that would travel under the northeast and southwest sides of Chino Creek. A new swim park is located where the existing archery range is currently located. This provides visual access from 71 Freeway and could potentially help to increase attendance. The shooting range remains in its current location, but the archery range moves to the east side of Euclid. A new community performing arts center would be located near the new main entry. Camping, adventure activities and the nature center would be concentrated together to create a good synergy between activities and is grouped together just south of the lake. South of this area, just off Cucamonga Avenue, there is an area for outdoor special events. Proposition 70 land is utilized to accommodate active sport fields and courts and a recreational pool. The agricultural education center and gardens occupies the southern part of Proposition 70 land.

KEY LEGEND Equestrian and Special Agricultural Uses

Ranges and Training Areas

Agricultural Grounds and Trails

Expanded Paint Ball Park

Agricultural Farm House Museum

Adjusted Paint Ball Park

Equestrian Performance

Relocated Archery Park and Range

Equestrian Boarding

Existing Gun and Skeet Range

Nature Center Building

Camping

Nature Center Outdoor Gathering / Gardens / Trails

Traditional RV Campground

Rentable Units for Camping

Semi-Public Leases 7

Dog Training Area

Primitive Tent Camping

Agricultural Lease

General Store

Adventure Activities

Aquatics

Zip Line

Splash Pad

Skate Park

Watercraft Rentals

High Ropes Course / Low Ropes Course

Public Launching Water Park Swimming Pool

Pump Track / Bike Skills Park

Adventure Playground

Obstacle Course

Golf Course 15 Existing Golf Course

Special Event Areas 16

Open Space for Special Events

Natural Areas and Habitats 41

Natural Area

New or Enhanced Habitat

New or Enhanced Natural Areas

Existing Natural Area

New Natural Area

Rentable Group Picnic Area

Community Performing Arts Center

Model Airplane Area Lease

Community Multi-Use Building or Spaces

Active Sports / Tournament Areas 20

Sports Fields Type 1 and 2

Court Sports

Fields for Semi-Formal Sporting Events

General Passive Park Areas 23

Group Picnic Area

Park Amenity Infill

Leash Free Area

Passive Park and Open Space

Model Airplane Area Lease

Chapter 6: Alternatives Development | 151

Cr ee k

3 24 24

26 43

19 18

Prado Lake

2 46

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 6-3: Alternative #3 Park Land Use

41 46

e Cr

1 45

152 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

6.1.4 Park Land Use Alternative 4 Alternative 4 proposes the most drastic reconfiguration of land uses. With a new connection at Pine Avenue to the Freeway, the west side of the park becomes much more accessible. By reducing the existing golf course, a new sports complex at the 71 Freeway and Pine Avenue becomes feasible. Pine Avenue will need to be built as a causeway or bridge over Chino Creek and these lowlands that frequently flood. If the Pine Avenue project every happens, then it would be very important to use this bridge or causeway to allow for park circulation under the bridge and from this new freeway connection. This would also make it logical to improve Pomona Rincon Road / Fairfield Ranch Road all the way to the north where the Dream Chino Hills / Fairfield Ranch Park exists. If this improved roadway system were put into place, the traffic signals would be needed where Pomona Rincon Road crosses Euclid Avenue. Proposition 70 lands are proposed to include ranges and agricultural areas to the north. The center of the park expands the camping and is co-located to the south of the lake with the adventure actives and the nature center. This, along with Alternative 3 are the only alternatives that preserves the model airplane lease in the middle of proposed agricultural land. On the west side of Euclid where the ranges currently exist, a new water park, competition pool, and sport courts are located so that they are highly visible from both the 71 Freeway and Euclid Avenue.

KEY LEGEND Equestrian and Special Agricultural Uses

Ranges and Training Areas

Agricultural Grounds and Trails

Expanded Paint Ball Park

Agricultural Farm House Museum

Adjusted Paint Ball Park

Equestrian Performance

Existing Archery Park and Range

Equestrian Boarding

Existing Gun and Skeet Range

Nature Center Building

Camping

Nature Center Outdoor Gathering

Traditional RV Campground

Rentable Units for Camping

Semi-Public Leases 7

Dog Training Area

Primitive Tent Camping

Agricultural Lease

General Store

Adventure Activities

Aquatics

Zip Line

Splash Pad

Skate Park

Watercraft Rentals

High Ropes Course / Low Ropes Course

Public Launching Water Park Swimming Pool

Pump Track / Bike Skills Park

Adventure Playground

Obstacle Course

Golf Course 15 Existing Golf Course

Special Event Areas 16

Open Space for Special Events

Natural Areas and Habitats 41

Natural Area

New or Enhanced Habitat

New or Enhanced Natural Areas

Existing Natural Area

New Natural Area

Rentable Group Picnic Area

Community Performing Arts Center

Model Airplane Lease

Community Multi-Use Building or Spaces

Active Sports / Tournament Areas 20

Sports Fields Type 1 and 2

Court Sports

Fields for Semi-Formal Sporting Events

General Passive Park Areas 23

Group Picnic Area

Park Amenity Infill

Leash Free Area

Passive Park and Open Space

Model Airplane Area Lease

Chapter 6: Alternatives Development | 153

41 20 15

in o

26 20

e Cr

Prado Lake

1 34 26

30 43

38 39

47 41

46 46

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 6-4: Alternative #4 Park Land Use

154 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

6.2 Park Circulation and Entry Options Proposed park circulation and entries vary with each alternative depending on where the concentration of new development occurs. New gates are required in every concept because of the expanded feature areas but use a combination of open entry, special event gates, staffed gates, and gates with card readers in an effort to minimize the additional staff that would be required to manage the entries. Major improvements are recommended for each alternative at River Road, McCarty, Cucamonga Avenue, Pine Avenue, Johnson Avenue, Euclid Avenue, and Hellman Avenue. As new development occurs some of these roads will be expanded and improved by developers. Because of land use restrictions, Proposition 70 lands can never be connected directly to the main park with vehicular traffic, but in all alternatives, hiking, equestrian, and multi-use paths are proposed.

6.2.1 Circulation and Gates Alternative 1 An open entry gate off Hellman Avenue (River Road) supports the paint ball park, all adventure activities, and equestrian and special agricultural activities. A fee would be collected at each of the destinations to capture entry fees. The future widening of Hellman Avenue by developers support additional traffic in this area. Alternative 1 keeps the main staffed gate in operation off of Euclid, but a new pedestrian bridge crossing over Euclid allows for nonmotorized traffic to connect both sides of the park. A new entry gate with a card reader is located off Johnson Avenue and on the west side of the park at the wildlife under-crossing at the 71 Freeway. Upgrades to Johnson including a new signal that the intersection of Pine is required. The entries at the ranges remain the same and a fee would be collected by the concessioner. The entry off Cucamonga Avenue utilizes a special event gate to facilitate traffic control during special events.

Euclid Avenue

O AD PR RD

MOUNTAIN AVE

GROVE AVE

Chapter 6: Alternatives Development | 155

PI N E

AV E

NC H

I D AV E

R A

EUC L

EL D

HELLMAN AVE

I FA

CHINO CORONA RD

O M

IN CO N

EU C AV LI D E

Y AD SH W VIE D R

S TI C

R ON D CA NY

NA RO CO P Y EX

Figure 6-5: Alternative #1 Circulation and Gates

RIVER RD

CH AN FIELD R BUTTER

156 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

6.2.2 Circulation and Gates Alternative 2

6.2.3 Circulation and Gates Alternative 3

6.2.4 Circulation and Gates Alternative 4

A new road and bridge at Hellman / River Road helps to provide access to the east side of the park . The entrances into the ranges, dog training facility, golf course and main entry remain in the same locations, but new signaled intersections are created. A new event gate is located off Johnson Avenue which is signalized at Pine Avenue In addition, a special event gate that is staffed is located off Cucamonga Avenue to accommodate new development on the east side of the park. All three entrances are open entries and fees would be collected by the concessioner.

In order to accommodate both motorized and non-motorized connections to both sides of the park that are segmented by Euclid, Alternative 3 proposes to elevate Euclid to allow for connection under the road. The main entry to the park is accessed via an off-ramp from Euclid and would be relocated further to the south. A staffed gate is proposed at Johnson Avenue and Cucamonga Avenue. Just one open entry gate is located at the Proposition 70 land.

Alternative 4 assumes a new freeway connection at Pine Avenue which allows for better access to the northwest side of the park. Round-abouts on Euclid would provide a reduction in traffic speed making it safer to access entries and new improvements to the park off this busy road. The staffed gate would remain at the main entry and a new on at Johnson. There would be a new special event gate off Cucamonga.

Existing Main Entry Gate

PR D

EU C

LID

AV E

E AV E P IN

HELLMAN AVE

MOUNTAIN AVE

GROVE AVE

Chapter 6: Alternatives Development | 157

CHINO CORONA RD

RFIELD BUTTE PO O M

RA H NC

N A

RI N

CO N

S Y AD SH W V IE

D R

STIC

C A NY

O N DR

NA RO CO P Y EX

Figure 6-6: Alternative #2 Circulation and Gates

EU C AV LI D E

R RD

PR D

EU C

LID

AV E

E AV E P IN

HELLMAN AVE

MOUNTAIN AVE

GROVE AVE

158 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

CHINO CORONA RD

RFIELD BUTTE PO O M

RA H NC

N A

RI N

CO N

S Y AD SH W V IE

D R

STIC

C A NY

O N DR

NA RO CO P Y EX

Figure 6-7: Alternative #3 Circulation and Gates

EU C AV LI D E

R RD

PR D

EU C

LID

AV E

E AV E P IN

HELLMAN AVE

MOUNTAIN AVE

GROVE AVE

Chapter 6: Alternatives Development | 159

CHINO CORONA RD

RFIELD BUTTE PO O M

RA H NC

N A

RI N

CO N

S Y AD R SH D W V IE

STIC

C A NY

O N DR

NA RO CO P Y EX

Figure 6-8: Alternative #4 Circulation and Gates

EU C AV LI D E

R RD

160 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

6.3 Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process All four alternatives were presented during a public workshop in which everyone was asked to identify their preferred alternative and list what was desirable and what could be improved for each concept. In addition to the public workshop, TAC and CAC groups also had a opportunity to provide input on their preferred alternative. An on-line survey was also used to determine the broader public’s view on the alternatives. While the majority of the components of Alternative 4 were the most popular, further refinement was required to ensure that the final concept took into consideration the following: The previous land use designations in the Army Corp’s Eco Restoration Plan were followed. Improvements related to architectural features were located on higher ground to reduce the potential for flooding. The capacity of the Prado Basin wasn’t altered to carry less water than currently exists. The success of the final concepts were not reliant on major improvements to Pine Avenue and Euclid Avenue as these are in the unforeseen future. That adjacent land uses, including those within and outside of the park boundary, were compatible. The proposed park improvements met the vision statement and goals established for the project.

Existing equestrian trails

Fishing at the Existing Lake

Recommendations

162 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

7 Recommendations 7.1 Park Land Use Final land use designations were assigned across the entire site. These designations were broken into seven categories. This land use map was based on public input, design team suggestions, and the final opportunities and constraints summary map. These categories include: Open Space/ Agriculture, Active Park and Sports, General Passive Park Areas, Natural Areas and Habitats, Camping, Special Event Areas, and Semi-Public Leases. The land use map is supplemented with more detailed site plans for the four different parts of the park. These include the West Side, North Central Park, South Central Park, and the East Side.

7.2 Interim Park Land Uses There are two options for land uses in the park where an interim use may be different than the long term use. Chapter 8 identifies logical phasing programs, but this section discusses areas that may stay as they are today until something triggers a change or a decision of some kind. These options include: 1) The golf course should remain in place until it has been decided that the soccer tournament and multi-use fields should move forward. Even at that time, plans, engineering, environmental review, and permits will require approximately two years before construction can start. Financial concerns and the downturn in golfing participation, would indicate that the golf course will eventually cease operations. The golf course should be considered for a short term or monthly lease. 2) The hunting dog training area is large in its lease area. However, the ponds are the essential component of this use. This plan recommends that if the archery range and rifle/gun shooting and skeet range become the venue for the 2028 Olympics, then it should be assumed that this rebuilt facility be placed on the south side of Euclid Avenue, on higher ground. The current location floods too much to be a good location to rebuild there. If the gun only components were rebuilt south of Euclid, then the hunting dog training area would have to be downsized. If both the archery range and gun ranges move to this site, then the dog training area may be too small to retain in this location.

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 163

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas

Land Use Categories Open Space/Agriculture Active Park and Sports General Passive Park Areas Natural Areas and Habitats Camping Ch

Special Event Areas

Semi-Public Leases

PHASING NOTES: 1. U ntil golf course lease is ended, will remain golf course 2. If ranges are rebuilt to South of Euclid, area to become dog training area. 3. I f airplane lease ended, would become overflow parking.

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 7-1: Proposed Land Use

164 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

7.3 Circulation Improvements

Euclid Avenue Pine Avenue Pomona Rincon Road Johnson Avenue Chino Corona Road Cucamonga Avenue McCarty Road Hellman Avenue This assessment examined roadways in the immediate vicinity of the park. Impacts may extend further once a detailed analysis is conducted. The potential extension of Pine Avenue to SR-71 would impact how trips are distributed among the roadway network. This analysis was conducted considering conditions both with and without the Pine Avenue extension. The table below shows the forecast park-only weekday average daily traffic (ADT) distribution to each roadway.

At the center of issues with the optimal use of land at Prado Regional Park are segmented sections of the park that are divided by major arterials like Pine Avenue and Euclid Avenue. Euclid Avenue is especially difficult for the park because it divides the park into four quadrants, the northwest side, the north and south sides, and the east side. None of these area are currently interconnected for park users. Therefore, it is critical to address the division created by Euclid Avenue. Although the alternatives looked at several ways the roadway impacts could be minimized, most of these methods are not likely to be approved by Caltrans since they affect the operations on a major arterial and truck route. Methods like traffic signals, roundabouts, or modifying Euclid Avenue to be a bridge structure would allow for connections and address safety and access concerns. But since these potentially affect throughout, they are not likely to be done, or at least done anytime soon. Recommendations for vehicular circulation and parking are based on trip generation associated with existing uses (referred to as “existing”) and buildout of the Master Plan (referred to as “Master Plan”).

Park only ADT

7.3.1 Trip Generation and Forecasts Existing and Master Plan trips were estimated based on the total acreage of four subareas and the proposed uses therein. The subareas are named based on their locations in the park: West, North Central, South Central, and East. Each proposed use was assigned a daily trip generation rate based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition as well as other traffic studies conducted in California for similar land uses. Where rates were not readily available, engineering judgment was used to determine suitable rates. This analysis is based on typical weekday traffic and project information available at the time of this plan. Future traffic assessments will require the collection of additional data to analyze weekend and peak hour operations. Estimated Daily Trips Estimated Daily Trips

Existing

Master Plan Implementation

Roadway

Without Pine Ave Extension

With Pine Ave Extension

Euclid Ave South of Pine Ave

4,144

2,487

Euclid Ave North of Pine Ave

2,072

1,658

Pine Ave West of Euclid Ave

2,072

Pine Ave East of Euclid Ave

1,658

Pomona Rincon Rd West of Euclid Ave

249

Pomona Rincon Rd East of Euclid Ave

Johnson Ave

203

Chino Corona Rd

2,072

Cucamonga Ave

2,072

McCarty Rd

Hellman Ave

2,487

West

1,527

2,843

North Central

477

752

South Central

700

3,520

7.3.2 Local roadway changes

East

3,956

Potential improvements were evaluated relative to capacity constraints and consistency with the City of Chino General Plan. This analysis was conducted on a cursory level to identify potential improvements. A full traffic impact assessment is necessary to develop refined recommendations. Based on existing lane configurations and 2018 ADT volumes, including the addition of forecast park buildout traffic, all roadways operate at under-capacity conditions except for:

Total

2,783

11,071

To understand implications of park development on local roadways, i.e., the estimated daily trips for the Master Plan implementation scenario, the trips were distributed to roadways based on the proposed park access gates and likely desired travel path. The potentially affected roadways in the immediate study area include:

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 165

Euclid Avenue - The 2.1-mile portion of Euclid Avenue from Bickmore Avenue to SR-71 varies from 2 to 4 lanes. The capacity ranges from 14,000 to 36,800 vehicles per day based on 2 to 4 lanes. Forecast traffic for this segment varies from 27,000 to 44,000 vehicles per day, resulting in overcapacity conditions for the 2-lane segment. Over-capacity conditions remain with the completion of the Pine Avenue extension. Pine Avenue - The 2.3-mile portion of Pine Avenue from Euclid Avenue to Hellman Avenue varies from 2 to 4 lanes. The capacity ranges from 14,000 to 32,300 vehicles per day based on 2 to 4 lanes. Forecast traffic for this segment varies 18,000 to 30,000 vehicles per day, resulting in overcapacity conditions for the 2-lane segment. With the completion of the Pine Avenue extension, the existing portion would remain over capacity. The extension would also force the 1.2-mile portion of Pine Avenue from Euclid to Pomona Rincon Road into over-capacity conditions.

Capacity Related Improvements Roadway/Location or Intersection

Euclid Ave

Between SR-71 & Pine Ave

Improvement Type Widen road to 8-Lane Divided Expressway with 206’ R/W (see General Plan)

Along Park Road Side Length (Mi) Frontage East

1.5

Yes

West

1.5

Yes

1.35

0.51

0.47

1.51

0.57

0.25

North 2

Pine Ave

Between Euclid Ave & Hellman Ave

Widen road to 6-Lane Divided Major Arterial with 120’ R/W (see General Plan) South

Pine Avenue Extension

SR-71 and Pine Ave

Roadway gap completion

Euclid Ave & Pine Ave

Intersection improvement

Johnson Ave & Pine Ave

Intersection improvement

Pine Ave & Chino Corona Rd

Intersection improvement

Pine Ave & Hellman Ave

Intersection improvement

Hellman Ave & Chino Corona Rd

Intersection improvement

In addition to the over-capacity roadways, several roadways in the immediate study area do not meet General Plan designation and will need to be improved. The table below lists these roadways and the types of improvements and the length of park frontage. Additional improvements proposed but not designated in the General Plan are also shown below. Unmet General Plan Roads Roadway

Location

Improvements

Park Frontage (mi) (1)

Euclid Ave

Between Pine Ave and Bickmore Ave

Lanes, Median, Sidewalk

0.0

1.1

Pine Ave

Between SR-71 and Euclid Ave

Lanes, Median, Sidewalk

1.4

1.0

2.4

Chino Corona Rd

Between SR-71 and Euclid Ave

Widening, Sidewalk, Trails

0.0

1.6

Chino Corona Rd

Between Pine Ave and McCarty Rd

Lanes, Median, Sidewalk

0.8

3.2

4.0

Note 1: Frontage includes both directions of travel representing half-width improvement projects. Additional Improvements Roadway

Location

Improvements

Park Frontage (mi) (1)

Cucamonga Ave

South of Chino Corona Rd

Widening, Trails

0.9

1.2

2.1

McCarty Rd

Between Cucamonga Ave and Hellman Ave

Bridge, Widening, Trails

2.6

0.0

2.6

Note 1: Frontage includes both directions of travel representing half-width improvement projects.

166 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

7.3.3 Bridge Improvements Bridge Crossing over Euclid The major proposed solution for Euclid Avenue is the construction of a pedestrian (hikers, walkers, and runners), bike (road and mountain bikes), and equestrian bridge that spans over the narrowest part of Euclid Avenue. This bridge would have to meet all vertical clearances and be long enough to span not only the current roadway lanes, but potentially four lanes of the roadway. The bridge would need to be a minimum of 14 feet wide and an approximate 100 foot span over the roadway. The bridge could be preengineered and placed on supports and ramps that would allow the trails to get to this overall height with at least 18 feet of clearance. In addition, in order to allow for equestrian use, a fence or fabric steel mesh would need to go as high as 10 feet above the surface of the trail. Ramps leading up to the bridge would need to meet ADA requirements of a 5 percent ramp without handrails or a 8 1/2 percent slope with handrails and landings.

Ramps needed to obtain height for bridge

Prefabricated bridge capable of well over 100â&#x20AC;&#x2122; span

Bridge Crossing over Cucamonga Creek along McCarty Road McCarty Road has existed for decades. Sometime in the past, the bridge over Cucamonga Creek washed out. The new bridge could be limited to 24 feet of travel lane, a 14-foot wide multi-use path on one side, and a 8-foot walkway or path on the other. It is likely needing to span approximately 600 feet.

Internal Park Bridges Implementing the recommendations will include the need for additional bridges across the spillway, as well as several smaller bridges across various smaller creeks. Existing bridges in the golf course could be reused. A bridge over a small creek running through the golf course would also be constructed to allow park trails to go under Pine Avenue.

Proposed location of bridge works with edge of road grade changes and the more narrow portions of Euclid

7.3.4 Signal Improvements Traffic Signals for Lower Euclid Avenue To improve safety crossing from Pomona Rincon Road over Euclid Avenue, traffic signals should be provided. Although the traffic volumes from this crossing may not meet warrants, a safety challenge exists because of the high speeds coming from the freeway off and on-ramps, a lack of platooning (bunching up of vehicles) since the right turn is not controlled at all, thereby encouraging high speeds to continue from the freeway, and limited visibility of seeing southbound traffic and northbound traffic coming on Euclid Avenue.

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas Chapter 7: Recommendations | 167

Open Entry/Fees at Destination

Proposed Circulation Features

Special Event Gate

Proposed (and Existing) Bridges

Staffed Gate

New Paved Road

Gate with Card Reader

Multi-Use Path

New Signal

Hiking Trail

Trail Crossing

County Road Improvements Proposed Site Plan

Ch in o Cr ee k C

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 7-2: Proposed Circulation

e Cr

168 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Traffic Signal for Johnson Avenue The intent of this plan is to utilize Johnson Avenue as an access point to the stables and the expanded equestrian facility and performance center. Based on proposed development to the north of Prado, this intersection is likely to have a traffic signal added as part of the approval of the major commercial development to the north.

Traffic Signal the Golf Course Entrance If the tournament center is built, a new signal will be required along this portion of Pine Avenue.

Pedestrian Crossing along El Prado Road If the tournament center is built, then two Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon or High-Intensity Activated Crosswalk Beacon (HAWK) crossings would be needed since trails will need to cross El Prado Road.

7.3.5 Roadway Improvements Widening of Chino Corona/Cucamonga Road In order to support safer access into the campgrounds and to accommodate proposed uses on the west side (expanded camping, a performing arts center) and the east side (the Prop. 70 lands connected through a new roadway at McCarty Road) of Cucamonga Road, an additional lane on each side of the road is likely to be needed. This expansion is likely to occur as part of adjacent residential development north of the park down as far as the start of Cucamonga Road. This is likely to require 2,900 lineal feet of expansion that may be the responsibility of the County. The new cross section would need to include a walkway or multi-use path along with additional lanes in each direction. If a walkway is provided, then bike lanes are likely to be needed as well.

Widening of McCarty Road In order to connect the new Proposition 70 lands to the existing lease on Prado Regional Park, the existing partial roadbed for this road will need to be improved. This extension of improvements would be nearly one mile in length. It is likely that this roadway could be one lane in each direction, in addition to the need to provide a soft surface trail and a hard surface pathway along the road.

Widening of Hellman/River Road Because of the intensity of improvements on the Prop. 70 lands, an expansion of this roadway is likely to be placed on the County to offset roadway capacity limitations. Approximately 6,800 lineal feet may need to have one lane and shoulders placed on the west side of the roadway. The current roadway already has two travel lanes going north.

7.3.6 Gate Improvements New Gate at Cucamonga Road A staffed gate is proposed to be located on the west side of Cucamonga Road. This gate will be the recommended gate for all east side park and camping areas. It will also be the primary entrance for the performing arts center, the nature center, and special events will also utilize this gate. The gate will also provide a second exiting point in case of fires and provides an eastern access point when Prado Lake overflows and covers the interior park road.

Entry Card Gates at the SR-71 Tunnel Since entry into most of the park requires a fee, the proposed trail that starts at the tunnel under SR71 may need control. For those with an annual pass, they will be able to access this area. Or, with a credit card, the gate will be able to be opened. It may be possible that the west side of the park does not need to be controlled since use of the soccer and multi-use fields will require reservations and the payment of user fees. If this is the case, then a special gate at Euclid Avenue may be all that is needed.

Entry Card Gate at Euclid Avenue Bridge A second entry card gate may be needed on the west side of Euclid Avenue, near the proposed trail bridge.

Special Event Gates at Johnson Avenue An electronic gate or special event gate is needed at Johnson Avenue. For special events, this gate would be open by traffic control personnel and a special barrier would be used to make sure that those entering the park for this function do not go into the main park.

Special Event Gates at Access Road to Overflow Parking The overflow parking area needs to have a controlled gate to limit casual use of the roadway that goes through the Orange County Flood Control District property. The County has an easement through this property and the right to use the unpaved parking lot, but it is limited to special events.

7.3.7 Park Trails and Paths Multi-use Path A total of 9.46 miles of hard or firm surface multi-use path is proposed in the park, with the following area breakout: West-side - 2.49; North Central - 1.32; South Central - 2.49; and East Side - 3.17 miles. The path needs to be a minimum of two 4-foot paved lanes with an additional 2-foot shoulder on each side for a total path of 12 feet. In areas of higher use, a 14-foot wide path is suggested.

Hiking Trail and Equestrian Trails A total of 19.48 miles of soft or firm surface trails are proposed in the park, with the following area breakout: West-side - 4.04; North Central - 5.47; South Central - 8.07; and East Side - 1.9 miles. The path needs to be a minimum of 4 feet wide with an additional 2 feet built where equestrian uses are expected.

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 169

7.4 Site Concept Plans and Renderings The site has been broken into study areas including the West Side , North Central, South Central, and East Side. Concept plans for each area have been developed and a variety of programs are indicated on each site.

7.4.1 General Park Amenities There are several program items that were highlighted in the user survey results and during public workshops that should be implemented in every study area. These are items that do not fit into a specific activity group, but instead should be distributed throughout and around the park. Linear recreational trails and paths were the most popular of any amenity or program presented during the public process. Social venues, such as picnic areas or shaded gathering spaces, ranked fifth. Outdoor exercise equipment, hunting dog training areas, and general court sports, such as tennis or sand volleyball, were also important to the community. In addition, park amenities should be considered for each area. The following is a list of amenities that should be considered to be high priority improvements throughout the park and are listed in prioritized order as indicated by the publics ranking through the surveys: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Improved shade such as shelters and trees; Continuous sidewalks throughout the park; Additional restrooms; Lighting for evening use; Drinking fountains; Way finding signage; and Increased parking.

Figure 7-3: Key Map for Study Areas

170 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas Road Improvements Future Condition Sub-Areas Study Areas East Study Area

North Central Study Area

South Central Study Area West Study Area

3a Ch

in o

Cr ee

12b

18a

11a

12e 12d

12c

15b 11b

12d

0.5 Miles

Figure 7-4: Project Study Areas and Sub-areas

12g

13c 11c

12h 13b

15a

22b

12f

0.25

12i

11d

13a

17a

21c

10a

14a

19a

9b 12a

e Cr

8d 9a

22a

22c

21b

21a

16a

21d

20a

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 171

7.4.2 West Study Area The map on the previous page breaks the entire park down into the four study areas, than again to another level, which are referred to as Sub-Areas. The West Study Area represents everything within the park boundary east of Euclid Avenue. It consists of natural areas and habitats near the Chino Creek corridor, includes the existing gun and archery ranges, and re-allocates the existing golf course to active park and sports.

Prado Tournament Center for Archery, Trap, Skeet, Pistol, and Shotgun Ranges Facility Goal: The primary goal for this facility would be the needed upgrade of existing facilities in an attempt to return to the legacy of the 1984 Olympics, as well as to encourage a greater level of prominence and participation in this center, since it could become more than just a local shooting and archery range. This would need to be a private investment and lease to a concessionaire similar to the current conditions. Facility Descriptions: Because of the location of the range within the floodplain and next to the natural course of the creek and riparian area, this facility needs to be rebuilt in another location or the area needs to be raised. The potential for new improvements would need to be located out of the flood-zone. The facility would need to be expanded with visitor information buildings, as well as operational and maintenance facilities and an expanded need for spectator viewing. The shooting ranges would need to utilize increased baffling and munition control to prevent issues with contaminants in the water supply and to control surface danger zones around the range. Facility Restrictions: If the facilities were able to evolve into national or international competitions, a signal would be needed at Pomona Rincon and Euclid intersections. Event scheduling and another gate and access road into the complex would need to be opened at the north end of the existing roadway system. The road has two names: Pomona Rincon near Euclid Avenue, and Fairfield Ranch Road north of the golf course where it connects to the Big League Dreams sports park at Fairfield Ranch Park. Proposed Site Location: The ideal site would be to rebuild these facilities on the land south of Euclid Avenue, just north of the freeway. This would move the facilities to higher ground, and landforms and baffling could be used to control noise and visual access. Facility User Groups: The first draw of users would come from local and expanded community market areas. The tournament level functions would appeal to a much more sub-regional and regional broader user group.

Market Area and Competition Concerns: It is not known if the capital needed to invest in a reconstruction of the facilities is possible given the difficulties of the site and the fact that current investments in facilities and their conditions is not enough of a reason to rebuild in this location. Traffic and access concerns, as well as encroaching land uses that are sensitive to noise, put to question the appropriateness of rebuilding in Prado Regional Park. This facility, if done well and marketed, could be a Southern California regional draw. If not expanded and upgraded or marketed for tournaments, it is likely to remain mostly an expanded community market area. Benefits: This facility could bring both visitors and revenue to the park and could also help in increasing the visibility of the park that may result in return visits. Concerns: The current facility floods on a regular basis. However, only if a new facility is proposed would it warrant looking at a new site. Overall Public Ranking of the Activities Associated with this Facility Group: Ranked 19 (Olympic venue ranges) out of 27 activities in the survey.

172 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Prado Regional â&#x20AC;&#x153;Fields of Greenâ&#x20AC;? Tournament Fields and Arena Facility Goal: Soccer continues to be a growing sport within southern California. Through a public procurement process, a concessionaire and investor could possibly construct and maintain a new soccer sports complex at Prado that could contain up to 24 soccer fields. This area could support a soccer arena and associated tournament fields as well as a significant number of fields to support youth programs and soccer development. Some of these fields would need to be more multipurpose in nature to support a broader youth program and to provide a more sustainable revenue source to offset expenses. Facility Descriptions: For the purposes of developing an initial concept, the proposed arena could include 3,500 spectator seats and team support areas. A locker room complex and scoreboard and associated parking and restrooms would be essential. Approximately 20 soccer fields could be integrated into the area for tournament play or practice fields. In the tournament area, the proposed facility would be a synthetic turf, full regulation sized field with lighting and enhanced amenities including scoreboards, shade, and portable bleacher seating. The associated site plan shows the 3,500 person arena, as well as six tournament fields with associated parking, restrooms, landscaping, and lighting (see sub-area 2b). Around this site, an additional 14 multi-purpose fields would be provided, utilizing real turf and stripped as multi-use fields to accommodate soccer, rugby, field hockey, lacrosse, football, and other sports field activities. These fields would be less amenitized than the six fields around the arena. They could be used for local soccer teams, as well as the semifinal rounds of larger tournaments, with finals being in the arena or on the six tournament fields. Ideal Site Location: The arena would require substantial investments and therefore should not be located in the lower inundation zones of the floodplain. All fields that are artificial turf would have to be in raised areas since inundation would be damaging to these fields. The proposed site is close to the freeways, especially if Pine Avenue is extended. The facilities are located away from sensitive natural areas and residential areas so that if lighting was included, it would not create any nuisance problems. The existing golf clubhouse could be revitalized and used as a park community center or dining facility. Existing bridges and many of the trails in the golf course could be saved and used as multi-use trails. Mature trees that were not in the way could be preserved, while others could be boxed and reused on site. Facility Restrictions: The potential intensity of a 3,500-seat arena would need to be controlled carefully so as not to contribute to peak traffic flow and congestion. Since the proposed site would have a short distance to freeways (especially if Pine Avenue is extended), problems of capacity may not be that great. However, congestion may be a problem if the activities of professional sports games or larger tournaments are not coordinated to be offset from peak traffic periods. Most tournament events would likely be on a weekend, although some are often on a three-day weekend. A professional team would likely include evening events and weekend events. The evening

events would need to be on lighted fields and held sometime after 7:30 or 8:00 pm to avoid peak time traffic of 4:00-6:30 pm. For practice fields, these time restrictions may not be necessary. Traffic control would be essential, and multiple gates may be needed. Weekend events would not necessarily create congestion problems. Facility User Groups: Local and community members would likely be the first level of users. This facility would have a large draw from soccer teams located in the valley. This would include weekend and weekday evening practices, likely requiring lighting. The second level of users are traveling teams for soccer tournaments. Finally, the professional sports level of use would attract local and valley residents, as well as the full potential range of the regional or sub-regional market. Market Area and Competition Concerns: This facility would have a regional draw from Southern California if the program would compete well with other local soccer facilities such as Norco Silver Springs. The USL team fans could pull from Southern California but would more likely pull from the sub-regional and expanded community level market area. Benefits: The proposed facilities would benefit the local soccer organizations and provide an entertainment venue for the local and sub-regional population. The facilities could be a good reuse of the golf course if it is decided that the golf course should not continue into the future. The venue may or may not bring in direct lease revenues compared to expenses, but it may result in increased money into the local economy, which will result in increased sales tax. Concerns: The proposed site is not free from flooding potential. However, the most sensitive facilities (those with synthetic turf, lighting and amenities) have been located on the highest ground while those with real turf and less amenities have been located in areas more prone to floods. Associated traffic is also a concern, but traffic management for large events can mitigate these concerns. May require subsidies for maintenance and operations or may even require long term capital support. Overall Public Ranking of the Activities Associated with this Activity Group: Ranked 23 (field sports), 25 (field tournaments), and 27 (sporting events) out of 27 activities in the survey.

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 173 20

NORTH

14 23

18 23 22

18 3

KEY LEGEND “FIELD OF GREEN” TOURNAMENT COMPLEX

17 10

5 19

21 22 5

Arena Awards Park

Soccer Only Full Tournament Fields (Typical)

Multi-Purpose Sports Fields (Typical)

Non-tournament Sized Fields (Typical)

Parking (Typical)

Shade Structures/Bleachers (Typical)

Restrooms (Typical)

General Open Space or Landscaped Buffers (Typical)

Under Roadway Tunnel or Over Roadway Bridge

Signalized Intersection

Future Roadway Improvements- Pine Ave. to 71

Multi-use Firm Surface Path (Bike/Ped/Skate)

Multi-use Soft Surface Trail (Hiking/Run/Equestrian)

Entry Point (No Gate/No Entry Fee)

Entry Point (Controlled Gate with Entry Fee)

NATURAL AREA & CONSERVATION AREAS 16 17

Figure 7-5: West Side Concept Plan

Arena Parking and Entry Plaza

TRAILS, PATHS & ROADWAYS

PARKING, PARKLAND & AMENITIES

3,500 person Soccer Arena Event Center

4 11

New Conservation Area Converted from Golf Course

Existing Conservation Areas

Enhanced Creek, Trails and Riparian Area

174 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

7.4.3 North Central Study Area The North Central Study Area consists of all the land uses north of Prado Lake and encompasses the existing improvements already found within the park. New facilities to be considered include an expanded equestrian center. The plan also enhances the active sports and passive park areas, and includes a section of natural area and habitat that is supported by a waterway. A trail around the entire lake would encourage multi-use activities, and the equestrian trails expanded to the south and the west ends of the park would provide a more robust horse riding trails

Prado Park Equestrian Center and Performance Arena Facility Goal: The existing equestrian and stables area are fully functioning, but in some need of expansion and upgrades. If the concessionaire chooses to, they could expand the stable capacity, including the number of hot walkers, open paddocks, jumping areas and other performance or training facilities. This could include several equestrian open and semi-enclosed arenas and training areas that would add more functionality and perhaps an increase in revenue for the park. The arenas could be both for training and equestrian events, performances and competitions. This would be a private concession. Facility Descriptions: The current stables could be replicated based on current layouts. However, some growth would be a positive feature and increase revenue production. The performance arena would need to include 500-1,000 seats and more hot walkers, storage facilities, and a training or warm up arena. It is very important to add increased access and quantities of equestrian trails to make horse rentals more viable and perhaps to encourage equestrian use levels through trailering to increase the park gate fees. Ideal Site Location: The current location would be acceptable, and perhaps the adjacent sports fields could be reconfigured for a training and performance arena. If the tournament facilities are built on the west side of Euclid Avenue, then these fields are no longer needed and could be converted for equestrian use. There is a trailhead for the limited equestrian riding areas that currently exist. However, this trail is short and does not connect with the trail system and recreational under-crossing under the SR-71. Future trails could be added to the north, east and south to provide these needed links. The proposed multi-use bridge across Euclid Avenue would allow this side of the park to become more connected with the west side, and could then feed into Chino Hills State Park to the west. Facility Restrictions: The intensity of the stable facilities should not result in restrictions on uses or time of day or week when they can occur. However, the performance arena would need restrictions to avoid conflicts with congestion at current peak hours of vehicular traffic and congestion in the area. Special entry gates and traffic control, as well as time restrictions, would be needed at Johnson Avenue. Since development is likely north of Pine Avenue and east of Johnson Avenue, a traffic signal is likely at this intersection, making connections to the equestrian performance arena and stables more convenient and able to handle more traffic.

Facility User Groups: The existing facility draws people from the local and expanded community market areas. This group would grow with more facilities. Performance events would attract equestrian enthusiasts from much further distances than stable tenants. The increased number of equestrian trails and connections to Chino Hills, along with the proposed campground expansions, could result in a major draw for those who want to bring their horses and potentially stay overnight. Market Area and Competition Concerns: Regional or sub-regional users will utilize these facilities, but it is more likely that expanded community level users from the valley would utilize them the most, thereby mostly limiting stable users to the local community and expanded community level market areas. The performance market area could be expanded community-wide (Valley) or subregionally depending on the success of a performance competition program. Benefits: The new facility would need to be able to improve storm-water runoff control beyond current conditions. The proposed equestrian trails would likely be multi-use trails (or next to multiuse paths), thereby benefiting more users, including those who want to hike or run on softer surface trails. Trails leading to the west side would provide for utilization of the expensive tunnel that was added under the freeway and would provide for a unique and educational experience of the parkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s natural resources and recreational amenities. Concerns: The improvements suggested require significant investments from a concessioner. The County could open this item and release it for bid for any interested parties. Overall Public Ranking of the Activities Associated with this Activity Group: Ranked 1 (trails), 16 (equestrian activities), and 22 (equestrian shows) out of 27 activities in the survey.

NORTH

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 175

KEY LEGEND 2

EQUESTRIAN CENTER EXPANSION

7 4

Event Plaza

Equestrian Event Center

Stables

Equestrian Trail

Hot walker and training arenas

SPORTS FIELD 6 4

LAKE TRAIL

Picnic Area and Plaza

Multi-use Trail

Picnic tables on concrete pad

4 7

Figure 7-6: North Central Concept Plan

176 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

7.4.4 South Central Study Area The South Central Study area includes everything south of the lake. New improvements include expanded campground areas, an expanded and amenitized special events area, a fitness camp, and a nature center with associated trails and native demonstration and botanical gardens.

Prado “Challenge Fields” and “Fitness Camp”-Special Sporting Event Area Facility Goal: The special event area consists of open space that can accommodate special event set ups in or near natural settings. This facility or area could be run by the County without the need for a concessionaire, but an event operator/applicant would be required. Facility Descriptions: The special sporting or social event area would consist of a 50-acre open space that has a variety of topographic features as well as minimal vegetation growth and low environmental sensitivity. Event facilitators would be responsible for constructing special purpose facilities like obstacles, running courses, cycle-cross courses, mountain bike courses, and mud features as part of the temporary nature of these events that may only occur once or a few times a year. This complex would also consist of a permanent obstacle course area of 2.5 acres, available for use with a fee. This complex would also include a zip line going from the high point on the site down into the proposed campground areas and the proposed nature center. Ideal Site Location: The proposed site area has a dirt road access from at least two directions, and it is adjacent to natural areas that create a nice setting, but not too close to create disturbances. The open space should be able to handle up to 5,000 individuals at certain sporting events and needs to include temporary parking areas to handle up to 2,000 vehicles. Its proximity to the nature center parking, the community performing arts center parking, and the various campgrounds is key in attracting special events that will also utilize the capacity of these other parking areas. This will require the development of additional roadways and gates, as well as trails, to accommodate this expanded use and to more fully utilize the park’s potential for these types of events. Facility Restrictions: Multi-day events that occur on weekends would not have any restrictions other than the maximum number of users. However, if there are scheduled events that attract a large number of users or spectators, then traffic control may be needed. If a weekday event is scheduled, then restriction to avoid local peak traffic times will be required. Facility User Groups: The primary events anticipated are sporting events that include runs, obstacle course activities, and other physical agility events such as Spartan Runs, Mud Runs, and Ninja Warrior challenges. The second set of users would include triathlons, trail runs, cross country events, cyclecross bike racing, mountain bike events, 24-hour events such as Ragnar and 24-hour rides, and 5k or 10k runs that either start or end at the regional park. A third set of users include war-games, medieval, pirate and renaissance fairs, and civil war or other war-games or reenactments. Boy Scout and Girl Scout jamborees and other camping based or orienteering or scavenger hunts would be

included. The final user group is related to social events such as motorcycles or sport cars, or other events that bring people of interest together, including hobbies, special equipment competitions, or displays. Market Area and Competition Concerns: This sporting area will benefit from the adjacent and expanded campground resources and therefore would have a regional draw throughout Southern California. Since these facilities are mostly about local experiences of the site, the draw comes mostly from how convenient, interesting, and well run the event is in order to build year after year participation. The local community or expanded community market is not as important as the subregional and regional market areas. Benefits: There could be a strong synergy between sporting, camping, and adventure uses at the park that would draw people to the tournaments and stay on site. This is even more likely when considering multi-day events where down time for family members can sometimes be several hours. When participants stay on site, these families and individuals would likely participate in other park activities as well, thereby increasing concession revenues. By providing on-site rentals and RV and tent camping, the County could help to capture not only sales taxes in the area, but also direct rental and concession lease profit sharing. This would build the size and attraction of these special events. Concerns: Traffic may be challenging. While this concept is in line with the Army Corps proposed Eco-Restoration Plan, further discussions with all stakeholders involved should be held to ensure there are no issues related to this activity in the areas indicated. Overall Public Ranking of the Activities Associated with this Activity Group: Ranked 13 (skills course), 15 (outdoor exercise equip.), 22 (regional events), and 27 (sporting events) out of 27 activities in the survey.

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 177 34

KEY LEGEND “FITNESS CAMP” AND “CHALLENGE FIELDS”

20 31

High Ropes Course

Low Ropes Course

Obstacle Beams and Climbing Towers

Pillow Jumps

Mud Runs

16 6

Zip Lines

Special Sporting Event Staging Area

“B & G” NATURE CENTER, TRAILS & GARDENS 25

Nature Interpretive Center

Nature Center Botanical Gardens/Nature Trails

Nature Center Bridge

Nature Center Parking

NORTH

“CAMP PRADO” & “THE GROVE” EVENTS32 CENTER 16

Existing RV Campground East

New RV Campground West

Converted Building for Teen Center/Games/Child Care

New General/Bait Store/Rentable Multi-Use Bldg.

Camp Fire Ring

Primitive Tent Platform Camping/Pitched Tents

Rentable Eco-Tents/Air-stream Rentable Trailers

Picnic Areas

New Self-Launching Pier

4 1

2 5

23 6 11

35 37

TRAILS, PATHS & ROADWAYS 30

Future Roadway Improvements

Bike/Ped/Equestrian Bridge over Euclid

Multi-use Firm Surface Path (Bike/Ped/Skate)

Multi-use Soft Surface Trail (Hiking/Run/Equestrian)

NATURAL AREA & CONSERVATION AREAS 35

New Conservation Area Converted from Farmland

Existing Conservation Areas

Enhanced Creek, Trails and Storm-water Ponds

Figure 7-7: Central Concept Plan

178 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Prado â&#x20AC;&#x153;Green and Blueâ&#x20AC;? Nature Center Facility Goal: The nature center or environmental center is intended to provide environmental education and interpretation, as well as to provide a trail system that includes interpretive elements around and through some of the natural areas of the site. It represents the intersection of nature (green) and water resources (blue) of the region. Many of these natural areas will be newly created, including nature walks, a native idea gardens, and a botanical garden, as well as signage and overlooks that will provide for the Interpretation of biology, habitats, hydrology, cultural resources, agricultural history, and park history. This facility would be run as a County entity. Facility Descriptions: The nature center would be a building of approximately 15,000 to 20,000 square feet. Parking can be slightly remote, especially if a drop off zone is provided for ADA

and school buses. The facility should be natural in appearance, made of wood and glass, and be very transitional from indoor spaces to outdoor spaces to bring nature into the facility. Ideal Site Location: The nature center should be located next to the natural setting of the park. Special design features may be needed to accommodate the potential difficult site conditions such as flooding. This could include a building raised up on stilts with outdoor decks. The nature center needs to focus on adjacent natural areas for both views and physical trail access.

experience. All markets are important, but a regional draw is not essential for success. A subregional draw may be important, especially for those that are likely to stay over multiple days.

Facility User Groups: The primary group of users are likely first to be school children and then non-profit environmental groups. The general park visitor is also very likely to visit this center if the park gate fees cover access to this facility.

Proposed site of the Blue and Green Nature Center (looking northwest)

Market Area and Competition Concerns: This facility benefits by being next to campground and natural resources. It could have a regional draw throughout Southern California, but may not be the primary reason why someone comes to Prado. It is more likely to be secondary to a special event, a school program, or a camping

Benefits: The park has a considerable number of natural settings, including both uplands and lowlands, that could be accessed by way of trails. The nature center would provide important educational and interpretive value to the park and the community. The nature center would also provide some weekday activities and destinations for a park that is not well utilized in the week. The nature center would also help to persuade park users to be more careful in the parkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sensitive areas and would provide eyes on the trail to make sure that non-damaging uses are occurring. Concerns: This location may flood. The building could be built up on higher stilts that would be contextually appropriate for a river side building. Overall Public Ranking of the Activities Associated with this Activity Group: Ranked 1 (trails), 2 (nature exploration), 5 (education programs), 6 (nature center), and 9 (gardens) out of 27 activities or improvements in the survey.

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 179

Typical character and concepts for the proposed project and its elements

180 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Camp Prado â&#x20AC;&#x153; Facility Goal: The camping center is intended to provide a wider range of camping options including primitive tent camping, cabins, streamline trailers, yurts or Eco-tents, and an expanded RV campground that would have a fuller range of amenities. One primary goal is to support the special events that commonly occur at the regional park and to also expose individuals to the increased amenities and activities that the park provides, thereby increasing non-event return visits to the park. The proposed camp center would also provide a general store with fishing supplies, as well as a converted multi-use building into a youth social and game center. The campground could be run by the County or be leased out to a concessionaire. The general store and game center/youth center should be a private concession. Facility Descriptions: The primitive tent camping facilities would include sites with graded decomposed granite surfaces for tents that may include raised platforms, water, a trash receptacle, and a picnic table. Approximately 25-30 sites are envisioned. This area or another adjacent area would also include pre-setup tents like Eco-tents for rent, including 10-20 rentable tents as well, with another 10 Eco-tents positioned on the high point of the area for spectacular views. Vehicular access would not be allowed into the primitive area, but carts would be used to bring in personal camping belongings from a short distance away. Group parking in the rentable Eco-tents area would need to be close by the tents. The rentable luxury areas would contain either Eco-tents, cabins, or yurts that would support a more comfortable and convenient level of camping, in addition to expanded personal RV hookup spaces and on-site parking. Up to 30 sites would be considered. A major new RV campground would be added on the southwest side of the lake. This would include approximately 250 standard RV spots and another 25 streamline replica trailers that could be rented.

The general store would be between 1,500 and 2,500 square feet and would include an outside eating area supporting an interior deli and food prep area. Restrooms with showers and laundry facilities should be considered. Individual hookups to sewer and 100-amp service could set the camping experience at Prado apart from other competing locations. Ideal Site Location: The new camping areas should build on the relationship with the existing campground and should be near both the lake and other natural areas. The primitive tent camping needs to be more of a dark and natural area of the park and can be placed at lower elevations. The luxury rentable facilities need to be close to roadways and other infrastructure. The Eco-tents should be in the mid-range of elevations since they can be moved out of the inundation zones when slow moving flooding occurs. The RV campgrounds can be at lower elevations since all campers are considered mobile. Restrooms and other buildings would need to be raised out of the floodplain. Facility Restrictions: The camping center would not likely generate peak traffic congestion problems, therefore traffic management and controls would not be needed. Traffic tends to come in at all hours and is not generally concentrated. However, a second exit or access point would be beneficial to provide emergency access in the case of flooding or fires or to accommodate another check in location and gate fee collection area. Facility User Groups: RV campers are likely to come from throughout the region. Other campers are likely to come from the Inland Empire area, unless they are associated with the special events in the park and would therefore be coming from the Southwest states. Primitive campers are more likely to be local users or campers from organizations like the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. Market Area and Competition Concerns: All market areas would be considered possible contributors of attendance. Having these facilities and camping options along with other amenities and activities available should substantially increase use from close and far. Benefits: The new facility would upgrade the camping experience and provide more options and quantities of camp sites that could increase revenues and the ability to accommodate special events. The expansion of camping types, including rentals, allows those that do not have larger RVs to camp in a more sustainable way that does not rely on travel with heavy and low mileage vehicles. The ability to support concessions in the park would also be improved by providing more weekday users that are drawn by the increased amenities and activities of the park. Concerns: Roadway and utility extensions may be difficult around the dam. This area is still subject to flooding which may require portable facilities to move. Restrooms need to be protected through higher grading. Overall Public Ranking of the Activities Associated with this Activity Group: Ranked 4 (social areas) and 8 (camping) out of 27 activities in the survey.

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 181

Typical character and concepts for the proposed project and its elements

182 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Groveâ&#x20AC;? Community Performing Arts Center Facility Goal: The primary goal for this performance center is to provide overnight campers with a gathering space for social interaction, provide for a leasing facility for corporate and private events, and to host performing arts events. In addition, the operation of musical performances, theatrics, educational gatherings, and special event awards programs for the public could occur. A small multi-use building would also be provided for some interior operations, food preparation, and larger internal meetings. This facility could be run by the County or by a concessionaire or consultant for coordination. Facility Descriptions: The focus of the facility would be an outdoor center. The center should include a stage, a structural stage backdrop, and electrical and acoustic options for amplified sound and communication, as well as evening stage lighting. The multi-use office, restroom, and equipment support building should be at least 2,500 square feet, but no larger than 5,000 square feet. The community performing arts centerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s maximum capacity would be up to 5,000 persons. Facility Restrictions: Because of the scheduled starts of events and the potentially large number of participants (5,000 persons divided by 2.5 average persons per vehicle= 2,000 vehicles), there is a chance that events could create high levels of congestion. These impacts can be offset by transportation demand management policies for alternative modes and shuttles, by controlling the start time of events, the requirement for traffic control for all events, and the use of multiple routes, directions and gates. Ideal Site Location: This facility has been placed on higher ground based on its investment. Distant views to the mountains should also be considered when siting this facility. However, it should also be worked into a landform in such a way to allow for control of amplified sound. Views are critical and would be of natural areas, but far enough away to avoid noise impacts to sensitive area. The facility needs to be near roadway connections and include multiple gates. Being near a commuter/ general aviation airport may be of some benefit for some individuals that would fly in. Facility User Groups: The first draw of users would be recreational campers in the park. Movie nights, small music performances, and a campground fire ring would be the primary focus of the space. Secondary uses would be for party or event rentals, in conjunction with an indoor multi-use space. A third level of use would be for weekday/daytime educational events either related to the nature center or the agricultural museum. Another use is anticipated to be a staging and operations center for the various recurring special events, including sporting, adventure, and other themed gatherings or social events. It is anticipated that the performance and educational center and multi-use building would be a rental requirement for any special event for more than 500 people. Finally, performing arts of musical, theatrical, and awards programs would round out the types of uses for this facility.

Market Area and Competition Concerns: This facility relies on campground and local visitors to utilize, as well as visitors and fans attending music events and concerts. Success is somewhat based on the unique setting of the valley views, views of the riparian areas, and adjacent open space and agriculture. Since the setting is unique and well maintained, this facility will be competitive with other settings. The facility has the character that motivates people to rent or to go to the center. Both the local community and the expanded community level market areas should be considered as there seems to be a shortage of this type of facility within the sub-region. Weekend and evening events or multi-day music events would draw people from the region and sub-region and could work well in conjunction with the adjacent campgrounds and other park amenities. Benefits: This facility could bring both visitors and revenue to the park and could also help in increasing visibility of the park that may result in return visits. Concerns: Traffic and noise are potential issues for adjacent residences. In addition to traffic management, scheduling of performances or rentals will need to have a prohibition on traffic generation of the facility during evening peak commute hours. Special event gates for immediate access and parking are to be considered, along with an operational logistic program that includes traffic control and overflow parking requirements. Overall Public Ranking of the Activities Associated with this Activity Group: Ranked 12 (community events), 18 (multi-purpose spaces), and 22 (regional events/concerts) out of 27 activities in the survey.

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 183 NORTH

KEY LEGEND

“THE GROVE” PERFORMING ARTS CENTER 1

Existing Historic Olive Grove

Fixed Seating

Open Terraced Lawn Seating

Open Lawn Seating

Restrooms

Entry Plaza

Stage with Backdrop

Earth Mounding to Reduce Sound Impacts

Olive Grove to Reduce Sound Impacts

11 1

TRAILS, PATHS, PARKING & ROADWAYS 11

Future Roadway Improvements

Multi-use Firm Surface Path (Bike/Ped/Skate)

Multi-use Soft Surface Trail (Hiking/Run/Equestrian)

Truck, Bus, and Emergency Access

VIP and Accessible Parking

Overflow Parking

Gates for Overflow Parking

17 16 17 11 12

11 5 8

6 16

13 13

2 14

Figure 7-8: Community Performing Arts Center

184 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

7.4.5 East Study Area The east study area is the Proposition 70 land. It includes fun and educational features with an agricultural theme, an extreme adventure zone, an aquatic center, and splash park. It also includes the relocation/expansion of the existing paint-ball park.

“Down at the Farm” Agriculture Fun Center Facility Goal: The intent of the theming of this center is to highlight the history of agriculture in the Inland Empire and more specifically in the valley adjacent to the site. This agricultural heritage is being lost at a very high rate in the valley and only remnants now remain. The primary intent is to provide a destination center with fun zones, eating areas, and rentable facilities for special social events and ceremonies. The East Study Area would then have day and evening uses, each with their own fee structure, but could also be combined with the other event areas or through annual passes. This facility could be run by a concessionaire or by the County. Facility Descriptions: A variety of agricultural themed structures would be added, including an observation water tower with bungee jumping, a barn, greenhouse, converted silos, a highly iconic tethered hot air balloon, and a variety of eating locations and picnic areas along with food truck potential. Ideal Site Location: This agricultural facility is next to a 10-acre area that needs to be preserved for agricultural uses or education. It could include a community garden, as well as other agricultural activities and the ability to accommodate a farmer’s market.

Facilities in form and function, should project the image of fun, agriculture and food

Facility Restrictions: The intensity of these facilities should not result in restrictions on uses or time of day or week when they can occur. Weekday use is possible through camping guests and school programs that include educational programs for local school districts. Facility User Groups: The primary users are school age groups during the week and family visits from those living around the area or in the Inland Empire. Regional or sub-regional users, especially school children, could utilize these facilities and this would be a vacation or “stay-cation” destination. Market Area and Competition Concerns: This facility could have a regional draw throughout Southern California, but may not be the primary reason someone comes to Prado. Regional or subregional users will utilize these amenities, but it is more likely that local or expanded community level users from the valley would utilize them the most. Benefits: The site can help to capture the history of the valley and preserve images and a way of life that was so prevalent in the area. Synergy between the various destinations on the East Side would help each activity become more popular, especially with discounted group passes. Concerns: Trip generation is a concern which may result in the need for a traffic management plan. The plan assumes that the expansion of Hellman, River Road and McCarty will be needed.

A whimsical look at agriculture should be balanced with being authentic and educational as well

Overall Public Ranking of the Activities Associated with this Activity Group: Ranked 4 (social venues), 7 (agricultural fun), 9 (gardens), 10 (innovative play), 13 (skill courses), 14 (splash basin), 15 (outdoor exercise equip), 17 (food trucks), and 18 (banquet halls) , out of 27 activities in the survey.

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 185 25

NORTH

KEY LEGEND

“DOWN AT THE FARM”

2 1

Water Tower Valley Overview/Crop Art

Barn/ Greenhouse Multi-use Building & Rental Venue

Tethered Hot Air Balloon

Agricultural Fields/Corn Maize Fun Zone

Adult Volleyball/Health/Fitness Area

Youth Play Adventure Areas

Food Pavilions/Food Trucks/Farmers Market/BBQ

Hayride and Entry Plaza

“Photo Opportunity” Pond and Outdoor Event Area

“EXTREME” ADVENTURE ZONE

27 16 16

Skateboard Park

High Ropes Course/Low Ropes Course

Expanded Paint Ball Park/New Entry/ New Parking

Existing Paint Ball Park

BMX/Mountain Bike Skills Park

Bike Pump Track

General Open Space or Landscaped Buffers (Typical)

“BLUE ZONE” SWIM & SPLASH PARK

12 12

Competitive Swimming/Diving/Lap/Wading Pools

Lazy River/Lagoon Swimming

Slides/Splash Pads/Spray-grounds

Shade Areas/Changing Rooms/Pool Equipment

TRAILS, PATHS & ROADWAYS 16 23

25 25

Figure 7-9: East Side Concept Plan

Future Roadway Improvements

Future Roadway Bridge/Connection to Main Park

Multi-use Firm Surface Path (Bike/Ped/Skate)

Multi-use Soft Surface Trail (Hiking/Run/Equestrian)

Entry Point (No Gate/No Entry Fee)

NATURAL AREA & CONSERVATION AREAS 26

New Conservation Area Converted from Farmland

Existing Conservation Areas

Enhanced Creek, Trails and Storm-water Ponds 21

186 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Typical character and concepts for the proposed project and its elements

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 187

Typical character and concepts for the proposed project and its elements

188 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Proposed site of the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Down at the Farmâ&#x20AC;? Fun Center (looking north)

Various eating, adventure and picnic eating areas (looking east)

Corn maize fields, hot air balloon and greenhouse (looking southwest)

Water tower, rentable barn and greenhouse for special events and crop art (looking northeast)

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 189

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Extremeâ&#x20AC;? Adventure Zone Facility Goal: The adventure center is intended to be a place for adults and children to play and discover in a manner that is related to the natural setting of the area, including its agricultural roots. It is highly likely that this facility would be a user fee-based concession. Facility Descriptions: There are two primary categories of facilities: 1) natural adventure courses such as ropes courses, obstacle courses, zip lines, rope bridge crossings, climbing walls, climbing towers, bouldering areas, and other adventure or orienteering areas; and 2) rolling adventure parks such as a BMX track, a bicycle pump track, mountain bike trails/jumps, and skate parks. These two facility types are located in different areas, however the adventure courses wrap the open space and trails, connecting the two areas together. Ideal Site Location: Proposition 70 lands were chosen because this land belongs to the County, which then allows for a higher certainty and control over leases, and it also provides a capital source for improvements and reinvestments. This land is also fully graded, mostly above the flooding zone and not under the direct control of the Army Corps of Engineers. It is also next to the existing paintball park, which fits into this same category of uses. This far eastern location would also be closer to new housing development, which may include a wide range of age demographics, including teenagers, that might enjoy these features. Facility Restrictions: These uses will mostly peak on weekends and therefore be offset with other congestion related commuter trips. Also, the roadway network is far enough away from the major arterials that typically get congested. Weekday corporate events and vacation based trips are generally off the congestion commute periods. The extension of McCarty Road with a new bridge, however, is essential to connecting the two sides of the park and providing multiple access points to these facilities. Facility User Groups: One primary group of users are corporate customers that may be interested in multi-day training and confidence building activities. These would also include clubs, non-profit organizations or sports teams. The second user group would consist of families, especially those staying at the regional park over several days. The third user group would consist of individual friends that may wish to attend or special age groups or organizations like the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. Finally, local residents are likely to dominate the rolling adventure facilities. Market Area and Competition Concerns: This facility benefits from the campground resources and/ or the paint ball park. It could have a regional draw throughout Southern California. It is also likely to be a secondary benefit to a special event or to a camping experience. The local community or expanded community market is not as important as the sub-regional and regional market areas for this draw. The adventure improvements, however, could improve local community and expanded community park guest interest in using the park, especially on week days.

Benefits: By itself, the adventure areas could be a revenue generator. However, in conjunction with the camping uses, they could generate more well-rounded use during the week and spin off increased revenues throughout the park. These uses are compatible with the natural setting and Army Corps definitions. In addition, the BMX/pump track/mountain bike trails and obstacle courses could attract weekday and weekend users, even from the local community, which is growing in population and which demographic has a high level of families with teens that would gravitate to this type of use. Concerns: There may be some concerns with traffic and noise if too close to natural areas. Overall Public Ranking of the Activities Associated with this Activity Group: Ranked 10 (adventure playground), 13 (skills course), and 26 (rolling adventure) out of 27 activities or improvements in the survey.

190 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Typical character and concepts for the proposed project and its elements

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 191

Typical mountain bike skills course

Typical soil compacted pump track for BMX and mountain bikes

Typical high ropes course

Typical skateboard park

192 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

The â&#x20AC;&#x153;Blue Zoneâ&#x20AC;? Swim Facility and Splash Park Facility Goal: The swim facility is intended to be a sub-regional water park that will provide aquatic programs and aquatic fun in a regional park setting. Given the summer heat and the lack of lakes, rivers and beaches for the Inland Empire, it would seem that this facility would be popular in the valley area. This could be run by the County or a private concessionaire could operate it as well. A fee would be charged at the entry gate to this facility. Facility Descriptions: There are three categories of aquatics that could be considered. The first is a swimming pool complex that would include competition pools, general swimming for health and kids, and adult pools for general recreation. The second category is that of more relaxation or adventure related aquatic such as lazy rivers, slides, and splash playgrounds. Finally, there are aquatics related to the use of the existing Prado Lake (see the North Central Site Plan) that could include kayak and canoe rentals, fishing, slips, and launch facilities, in addition to stand-up paddle boards and paddle boats. This third category would be associated with the existing lake and could utilize existing facilities. Ideal Site Location: If the facility were only a swimming pool complex, it would be best sited in the existing park, near the campground for additional user access. However, the synergy associated with other adventure activities and the Proposition 70 lands disposition would make for a much better leasing and County control of this facility along with a capital funding source. Facility Restrictions: The swimming complex could generate a sizable number of trips, but these trips would likely be off-peak traffic congestion periods. Weekend use would be high followed by after school periods during warmer weather and on holidays. For those on vacation or not working, the time frame could be throughout the week or on weekends. For the facility to be worth the investment, evening hours should be considered, especially on weekends. There should be synergy between the campground, adventure features, and the aquatic park.

Facility User Groups: The primary user group would be visitors to the park and visitors to the Inland Empire. The second user group would be campers. The third user group would be local and community residents, especially for the swimming pool complex. The fourth user group would be related to competitions. Market Area and Competition Concerns: Regional or sub-regional users will utilize the swimming park and to a lesser extent, the pool complex. Community level users may also utilize the facility. Local community or expanded community users would mostly utilize the swimming pool complex. For the Prado Lake uses, fishing would be done by a full range of users, depending on if they are in the RV campground or not. Watercraft in the lake would likely be day visitors and campers. Benefits: The new facility would provide the valley with a significant source of recreation and relaxation, as well as fun. The swimming pool complex would be good for local and community members in terms of health, swimming lessons, and sports programs, especially as the residential development increases around the site. Increased activity at Prado Lake would also improve park revenues since they would result in more activities that would make the gate fee more reasonable, and also more concession related profit sharing of the increase use of paddle craft and boat rentals. Concerns: Trip generation may be a problem, but improvements to segments of the local roads and the extension of McCarty Road with a new bridge, would address many of these concerns. Overall Public Ranking of the Activities Associated with this Activity Group: Ranked 3 (watercraft), 11 (aquatic play), and 14 (pool) out of 27 activities in the survey.

Chapter 7: Recommendations | 193

Typical character and concepts for the proposed project and its elements

194 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Possible recreation swimming pool and slides

Possible lazy river complex

Medium height tube slide and receiving pool

Combination of possible spray-grounds, slides, lazy river and pools

Typical competition pool

Implementation

196 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

8 Implementation There are many aspects that need to be taken into account in order to implement the ideas and plans shown in this document. It is not within the scope of this study to identify all of the steps and to provide all of the answers to the complex challenges that are involved with navigating the implementation process. The most important elements, arranged in the relative order in which they may need to be addressed include: 1) Continue discussions with the Army Corps of Engineers to obtain a new long-term lease or easement for the continued use of the property. It is essential that long-term agreements with the Corps be obtained before major investments from concessionaires or the County are undertaken. 2) Work with the State of California for the revisions of the proposed uses for the Prop. 70 lands as shown on the East Side Study Area maps. Determine the funding parameters for additional investments from the State Prop. 70 accounts and apply for these grants. 3) Undertake an environmental review of the proposed project. This programmatic level of environmental review and documentation is needed to streamline the implementation of the master plan. 4) Initiate a floodway and grading master plan to determine the level of increased elevation and the matched reduction in elevation of the park lands to avoid net change in the basinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capacity. 5) Initiate discussions with the Corps of Engineers about the disposition and the credit obtained if areas are converted from disturbed lowlands and uplands to sustainable natural wetland communities if invasives are removed and the elevations are dropped to create lands where riparian growth would be sustainable based on groundwater. 6) Work with Caltrans and other transportation agencies, as well as the cities of Chino and Eastvale, to understand requirements and roles for the improvement of McCarty Road, Cucamonga Avenue, and Hellman Avenue. Obtain preliminary review and approval for the proposed Euclid Avenue pedestrian and bike bridge. 7) Negotiate the reduction of land assigned for the golf course use with the concessionaire. More urgent timing, however, would be to work with the interested parties for the development and leasing of the soccer arena, tournament fields, and multi-use fields. If the private parties are willing

to front the capital costs and maintenance requirements, then a potential long term lease could result in some revenue gain from the implementation of these facilities. This would require initial design to verify space requirements and locations, as well as construction costs. A business and financial plan is critical to obtain prior to any approvals. These items should be done prior to having the golf course close. 8) Work with the paintball park operators and owners to have encroachments on McCarty Road removed, and negotiate a removal in areas used south of McCarty Road. Identify a replacement of this space to the north to allow the paintball park to maintain the acreage of the lease, or negotiate a new lease that is larger than the current lease. Permanent parking lots, entry gates, screening, and landscaping, and the restoration of the riparian lands disturbed by the use of these sensitive lands south of McCarty Road should be included. 9) Complete information packets and a request for proposals to solicit a variety of opportunities for expanded or new concessions at the park. Require the concessionaire work out 35% schematic plans for their proposals. A two step process that identifies financially stable and motivated concessionaire is suggested. Qualified operators can then be invited to submit a full proposal, including a proforma, revenue analysis, capital expense estimates, length of lease, profit sharing, and site plans with a detailed program for the concession. 10) Complete a topographic base map with detailed features and research on utilities and easements. Then solicit proposals from civil engineers, site planners, and landscape architects to produce a schematic plan for infrastructure, roadway expansions, park roadway layout, multi-use paths, and trail layouts, as well as new gates, parking areas, and other major amenities that the County would implement. Complete an infrastructure analysis of capacity, condition, and future utility requirements, and identify a main distribution of electric, water, sewer, stormwater, and data lines needed to support future growth. 11) Initiate a program for grant writing, Board of Supervisor initiatives, and potential general development fund, enterprise funds, bonds or other tax assessments or revenue streams the County can pursue. 12) Work with regional park staff and the local agencies to obtain a Memorandum of Understanding and intent to implement this master plan. 13) Initiate a new round of public input once the steps above have been completed to obtain prioritization and to vet additional concerns. This may be most appropriate to complete during the required environmental review phase.

Chapter 8: Implementation | 197

8.1 Inundation Factors The Army Corps of Engineers has established that the Prado Dam’s inundation level sits at elevation 566’, which encompass the entire park site and goes well beyond the park boundaries, especially on the eastern side. There are only a few spots that sit above elevation 566’ and are indicated in the map on the next page and the table below. Otherwise, all other areas are at risk, but to varying degrees. The value of proposed development has been categorized into two categories, high and medium, and overlaid on top of five different elevation zones to identify risk. As can be in the General Inundation Zones table, only 3% of the entire park is out of the potential upper inundation zone. So if all inundation areas were restricted from park development, there would be no park. Therefore, a zonal approach is needed. The goal is to keep high investment facilities above the 546’ elevation. Medium investment facilities like campgrounds and picnic areas, could be allowed to go down to the 506’ level if they can moved out of harms way from floodwaters. It should be kept in mind that these floodwaters have low levels of force and damage other than submerging since they slowly back up from behind the dam. Some inundation in a park is normal, but high investment facilities should be kept above the vast majority of flooding events. For example, turf fields benefit from some flooding given increased water and siltation for soil buildup. However, flooding of synthetic turf areas would be more challenging. However, newer technologies regarding flooding and artificial turf have been developed and could be applied in these situations.

8.2 Proposed Grading Concept Since much of the site can find itself underwater, care must be taken to assure that high investment buildings and structure be limited to areas that are currently at the upper range of the inundation level or where they can be raised enough to bring them out of this flood plain. No filling will be allowed by the Corps of Engineers unless there is an equal or greater excavation that removes the same level as fill. This requirement can actually represent an opportunity. If areas are indicated to be lowlands or riparian zones, then some of the park site could be lowered by several feet so that it does flood, which supports riparian health. If areas within a short hauling distance could use an elevational increase, then the cut and fill can be balanced and costs lowered. Double handling of material is always expensive, so proposed areas needing to be elevated are ideally located in areas where borrow or cut areas could help create the wetlands. The resulting excavation could bring revegetation efforts into contact with groundwater, thereby assuring the new habitat will thrive. Calculations for unacceptable fill that cannot be compacted and used in high investment facilities to create higher pads may need to be trucked off-site. Also, the typical compaction process for grading means that more fill must be taken into account, assuming a 20-25% volume loss after compaction. Without a grading plan, it is difficult to determine how much cut is available and how high development areas will be allowed to go given the Army Corps of Engineers need for reservoir capacity. In most cases, the excavation areas could be several feet deep while the fill areas may

Table 8-1: General Inundation Zones All Park Areas

Acres

Above 566' Inundation Line

70.00

0.44%

546 - 566'

734.80

29%

0.00%

526 - 546'

852.75

33%

506- 526’

555.05

22%

488 - 506’

348.90

14%

Total Park Acres

2,561.5 Acres

100%

High Development

Acres

Above 566' Inundation Line

0.07

0.00%

546 - 566'

64.43

2.52%

526 - 546'

11.37

506 - 526’

0.10

Medium Development

Acres

Above 566' Inundation Line

4.44

0.17%

546 - 566’

146.32

5.71%

526 - 546’

99.71

3.89%

506 - 526’

12.99

0.51%

488 - 506’

0.17

0.01%

Total Acres Developed

339.60 Acres

13.54%

only add a couple of feet to their elevation gain. So, the borrow sites are shown on the map on the following page to be much larger than the fill areas. This should provide adequate mass fill material. It should also be noted that some imported fill will be required. Under the assumption of a 20% exporting of poor fill material and the shrink related to compaction, then new and more appropriate fill should be imported.

8.3 Site Area Assignments The study has attempted to place requested facilities in areas that have few constraints. However, because of flooding, the majority of the site has some level of constraint. Many of these slightly constrained areas will become less of a constraint by raising them a few feet and removing previous uses, such as the golf course. With the exception of some of the camping areas, most are elevated out of the floodplain as much as possible. Note that the Prop. 70 lands are mostly in a good location in regards to constraints, as are the southwest RV campground, performing arts center, and the camp center. The nature center is intended to be on lower grounds, but can be protected through site design with grading and building the structures more on stilts and boardwalks. Proposition 70 lands were chosen for many of the higher investment facilities since it offers a lower level of constraints and this land belongs to the County, which then allows for a higher certainty and control over leases. The Prop. 70 funding policies also provide a capital source for improvements and reinvestments. It is also next to the existing paintball park, where adventure type facilities fit well with this existing use. This far eastern location would also be closer to new housing development, which may include a wide range of age demographics, including teenagers, that might enjoy these features.

198 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas 566' Inundation Line (Army Corp.) Value of Proposed Development High Medium 546 566'

20' Elevation Zones Related to Modeled Inundation Line Above 566' Inundation Line

546 - 566'

546 - 566' 526 - 546'

546 - 566'

506 - 526'

526 - 546'

488 - 506' Ch in

546 - 566'

o Cr ee k

546 - 566'

506 - 526' 546 - 566' 526 - 546'

> 566' 488 - 506'

526 546'

> 566'

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 8-1: Inundation Risk

546 - 566'

> 566'

546 - 566' 506 - 526'

526 - 546' 488 - 506' > 566'

526 546'

546 - 566'

Chapter 8: Implementation | 199

Areas of Needed Deposition (Fill) for High and Medium-Value Development (by Sub-Area) and Areas of Sourcing Earth Sub-Area

Areas for Deposition (Acres)

10a 11a 11b 11c 15b 16a 17a 18a 20a 2a 2b

9.08 2.51 2.34 23.76 15.77 31.64 27.10 17.24 4.64 41.90 68.34

1b 2b

3b 1a

3a 3a 2b

Ch in o

Cr ee

Sub-Area

Areas for Deposition (Acres)

3a 6a 6b 6d 7b 9a 9b 9c 9d 9f

2.63 0.04 0.05 0.10 2.21 28.94 5.53 6.00 3.69 4.70

19a

9b 9f 12a

12b

18a

11a

12c

12e 12d

20a 11b

12d

Deposition (Fill)

15a

12i

11d

12f

13a

21b

Candidate Areas for Sourcing Soil 12g

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 8-2: Conceptual Grading Plan

13c 11c

14a

12h 13b

17a

21c

10a

Future Sub-Areas

e Cr

21a

15b

16a

21d

200 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Future EHL Condition Sub-Areas Proposed Site Plan Opportunity and Constraints Summary Best location for new park development High opportunity area Moderate opportunity area Low opportunity area Neutral (slight opportunities or constraints) Very low constraint area Low constraint area Moderate constraint area Ch

High constraint area

ee Worst location for new parkCrdevelopment

Cr ee k

Prado Lake

0.25

0.5 Miles

Figure 8-3: Overlay of Proposed Site Plans on Opportunity and Constraint Summary Map

Chapter 8: Implementation | 201

8.4 Conceptual Construction Cost Estimates and Operational Costs Anticipating costs of proposed elements is an important factor in determining priorities, feasibility, and the extent and breadth of planned uses and changes for the park. Since the park is large enough to accommodate all uses identified and prioritized by the public, this plan has included all suggested uses. However, budget limitations will dictate the elements that can be moved forward into implementation. Not all aspects of the project recommendations are essential for implementing. Not all proposed concessions or uses may be strong enough to meet market and financial feasibilities. However, if an element becomes feasible based on the will of those supporting change, it will be in the master plan and in the subsequent environmental review to allow it to be implemented. If it is not in this plan, then new elements will be difficult to implement since they will not have the benefit of the approval process and environmental review, and these elements will not likely be supported by stakeholders who have been involved in the master plan process. If the ideas are not in the plan, then even pursuing a grant becomes less feasible if it is not included in an adopted plan or been vetted with the public and concerned agencies. Obtaining accurate costs are extremely difficult at this early stage and the estimates do not guarantee that programs and project will be funded. Accurate costs are only realized when a full set of construction documents have been prepared, bid, and accepted by an agency. Accurate numbers require accurate plans based on accurate mapping and detailed layouts. None of these factors have been completed for this effort, so using the numbers as a predictor to actual costs that are likely to be incurred is not recommended. However, seeing a range of numbers and the relative magnitude of an individual project compared to other projects is useful. Planning what the County can fund, what a concessionaire can afford, and what types of funding levels can be requested through grant programs is very helpful and appropriate. Although the construction estimate appear to be very detailed as shown in the following spreadsheets, they are not based on detailed plans, and therefore the numbers should not be considered highly reliable. In all cases, each major component should be considered to be a range of costs, rounded to the nearest $100,000 in either direction. Although more minor elements will not be this expensive, it is suggested that groupings of costs have a range of -10% and +20% in the non-rounded costs shown on the table. The following assumptions and details associated with the cost estimates needs to be understood for the context of the numbers generated.

1. For infrastructure costs, the East Side Development Area is assumed to be annexed into the neighboring Western Riverside County Regional Wastewater Authority and Jurupa Community Services District due to the proximity of existing utilities. If this assumption is not achieved, then the connection to utility mains will require additional costs. 2. The capacity of the existing mains are assumed to be sized to handle the proposed developmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s flows. 3. The water storage tank and booster pump, located within existing Prado Regional Park, are assumed to be sized correctly for the proposed Western Development Area. 4. Stormwater treatment BMPs are assumed to be bioretention basins. This assumption is based on the USGS Hydrologic Soil Group C preventing the use of infiltration basins. A geotechnical infiltration test could allow the use of less expensive infiltration basins. 5. The percent impervious for the site was estimated based on impervious hardscape area vs. pervious landscaping area. The synthetic turf used in the soccer tournament center is assumed to be an impervious surface, while the standard turf fields are assumed to be permeable. 6. The development areas are assumed not to be susceptible to hydromodification requirements except for the West Side concept area, where the sports fields with artificial turf increases imperviousness. 7. Grading and fill activities needed to raise certain high investment facilities are assumed to be allowed by the Army Corps of Engineers as long as a corresponding volume of material is excavated from other portions of the site. It is assumed that 20 percent of the cut will not be usable for on-site fill and that 20 percent more fill will be needed based on compaction requirements for constructible areas proposed in the plan. 8. The numbers include: a combined design, engineering, environmental review and permitting of 20 percent; a contingency of 20 percent; an annual compounded escalation rate (starting after 2020) of 3 percent. 9. The estimates assume that all mitigations for biological impacts (if any) can be obtained on-site by reclaiming, restoring, and enhancing ares. 10. Unit costs have been reviewed by the consultant team, however, without a professional estimator approved in the scope of work, the level of accuracy of these unit costs could range 10-20% percent. 11. All numbers used include all labor and materials and assume a prevailing wage requirement. 12. The estimate sheets also identify the sequence order or anticipated year, the overall public input priority, the likely funding source, and the anticipated number of existing and proposed vehicle trips per day.

Table 8-2: West Side Study Area Conceptual Estimate

202 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan WEST STUDY AREA

PRADO REGION AL PARK MASTER PLAN ID Ge ne ral Land Use De scri p ti on Panhandle Conservation I

Triangular Conservation I

Conservation I / Golf Course Conversion

Existing Conservation Area

No rth o f Pine Ave and West o f El Prado Rd

Survey Rank

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1&2 Pre-fabricated Bridge 1 Mass Cut Trucked to Nearby Fill Sites (-5' over 25% of acres) NA Poor Fill Material Exported (assumes 10% of cut) NA Lowland Restoration including Irrigation, Fencing & Signage 2&9 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9

Mid-block Crosswalk with Ped. Hybrid Beacon/Signs 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Protected Trail along West side of Roadway over Bridge Area 1 Upland Restoration including Irrigation & Signage 2&9 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

Chino Creek Corridor Conservation Area II

Sequence Order Location

No rth o f Pine Ave and East o f El Prado Rd

No rth o f Pine Ave

1.10 Invasive Species Removal 9 1.11 Upland Restoration including Irrigation & Signage 2 1.12 Lowland Restoration including Irrigation, Fencing & Signage 2 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19

So u th o f Pine and East o f 71

Phasing

Existing Conditions

Funding Source

Unit

A cr e s 124.36 Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space

As Funding is Found 10

Borrow Site: Mitigation Banking

As Funding Is Found 10

Mitigation Banking

As Funding Is Found 9

Mitigation Banking

Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Possible Site Used Multi-use Trails Upgrades (assumes 50% covered by cart paths) 1 for Mitigation New Multi-use Trails (assumes 50% already covered by cart paths) 1 Credit for other Mass Cut Trucked to Nearby Fill Sites (-5' over 25% of acres) NA Poor Fill Material Exported (assumes 10% of cut) NA Agency or Private Upland Restoration including Irrigation for 25% of Area 2&9 Party Lowland Restoration including Irrigation for 25% of Area 2&9 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) Mitigation Banking 7

So u th o f Pine Ave and West o f Eu clid

1.20 No changes expected in this area 1.21 Mass Cut Trucked to Nearby Fill Sites (-5' over 25% of acres) 1.22 Poor Fill Material Exported (assumes 10% of cut) Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11 2.12 2.13 2.14 2.15 2.16 2.17 2.18 2.19 2.20

Active Sports / Multi-use Fields

Active Sports / Frisbee Golf & Bridge

Tree, Debris & Turf Removal / Hauling NA Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 50% of acres) NA Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 25% of acres) NA Electrical Extensions NA Water Extensions / Connections to Fields NA Sewer Extensions / Connections to Fields NA Storm Drain Improvements NA Once Golf Course Multi-use Field Development (Tournament Sized no Lights) 23 & 25 Leaves and A Deal Multi-use Field Development (Practice Sized no Lights) 23 & 25 with a Walkway & Building Security Lighting Only NA Restroom Buildings NA Concessionaire is Renovated Clubhouse and Maint. Facility 4 & 18 Finalized Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA Parking Lots (Asphalt, curb stops, planters, trees and lighting) NA Upgraded Existing Cart Path Bridges (new railing & surface) NA Multi-use Trails (assumes 50% covered by cart paths) 1 Upgraded Multi-use Trails (assumes 50% covered by cart paths) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 General Landscaping and Irrigation (5% of area) NA Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 8

2.40 2.41 2.42 2.43 2.44 2.45

Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Once Golf Course Multi-use Trails (assumes 50% covered by cart paths) 1 Leaves and A Deal Upgraded Multi-use Trails (assumes 50% covered by cart paths) 1 with a Conversion of Golf to Foot Golf & Frisbee 18 Concessionaire is Elevated Concrete Multi-use Trail for Bridge Ramp 1 Finalized Trail Bridge Over Euclid (15' wide, 100' Long with 8' Fencing) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 3

Open Space / Creek Redevelopment

3.9 3.10 3.10 3.12 3.13 3.14

Mass Cut Trucked to Nearby Fill Sites (-5' over 25% of acres) NA Would be Paid for NA Poor Fill Material Exported (assumes 10% of cut) by Concession Deal Upgraded Existing Cart Path Bridges (new Railing & Surface) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 for the Soccer New Multi-use Trails (assumes 50% already covered by cart paths) 1 Complex Lowland Restoration with Irrigation, Fencing & Signage (25%) 2&9 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 4

5a 5b

Single Purpose Lease- Gun Range Single Purpose Lease- Archery Range

A cr e s 72.43 Existing Area is a Golf Course

A cr e s 72.43 Future Use it Open Space with Trails

Borrow Site:

20% 20% 3%

A cr e s 140.47 Future Area will remain Conservation I Sent to Fill Site: 2b

406.62 46.15

To tal Acres

406.62 46.15

A cr e s Future Use is a Tournament Center Fill Acres: 41.90 Fill Acres: 41.90

A cr e s 106.25 Existing Area is a Golf Course Cut Site Brought from: 1a+1d Import from Offsite:

A cr e s 106.25 Future Use is an Active Sport Field Fill Acres: 68.34 Fill Acres: 68.34

A cr e s 40.61 Existing Area is a Golf Course

A cr e s 40.61 Future Use is an Active Sport Field

193.01 54.36 2b

Fu tu re Acres

193.01 54.36

A cr e s Future Use it Open Space with Trails

Fill Acres:

2.64

Conce ssi onai r e A cr e s 15.82 Existing Area is a Golf Course Cut Site Brought from: 1d Import from Offsite:

A cr e s 15.82 Future Use it Open Space with Trails Fill Acres: 2.64 Fill Acres: 2.64

Conce ssi onai r e

No rthwest o f Eu clid

Combined Design, Engineering, Environmental Review & Permitting Contingency (Considering Preliminary Nature of Concept) Annual Compounded Escalation Rate from 2020

Sent to Fill Site:

A cr e s Existing Area is a Golf Course Cut Site Brought from: 1a Import from Offsite:

Conce ssi onai r e

70.18 78.42

Acres f o r 3a & 3b

70.18 78.42

Acres

Quantity

Adjustments

Existing Vehicle Trips per Day

Future Vehicle Trips per Day

Sub-total Cost

With Soft Costs

With

With Escalation

Trips per

Sub-Total Trips

Trips per

Sub-Total Trips

7,914 1 143,824 14,382 49,000 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 a

$118,710 $200,000 $3,595,594 $71,912 $147,000 $4,133,216

$4,959,859

$5,951,831

$7,998,762

0.00

0.78

$70,000 $15 $30 $2

2 308 279 49,000 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 b

$140,000 $4,620 $8,370 $98,000 $250,990

$301,188

$361,426

$485,726

0.00

0.78

SF SF SF

$0.25 $2 $3

2,422,295 1,211,147 1,211,147 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 c

Acres LF LF LF CY CY SF SF

$605,574 $2,422,295 $3,633,442 $6,661,310

$7,993,572

$9,592,287

$12,515,759

0.00

0.78

$15 $50 $200 $25 $5 $2 $3

2,793 4,534 1,936 32,141 3,214 788,735 788,735 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 d

$41,895 $226,700 $387,143 $803,519 $16,070 $1,577,470 $2,366,206 5,419,003

$6,502,804

$7,803,364

$9,597,154

3.70

268

0.78

CY CY

$25 $5

32,141 3,214 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 e Sub-t ot al $ for 1 a t hr u 1 e

$803,519 $16,070 819,589 1 7 ,2 8 4 ,1 0 8

$983,507 $ 1 3 ,2 5 4 ,6 1 9

$1,180,208 $ 1 5 ,9 0 5 ,5 4 3

$1,252,083 $ 2 1 ,0 0 0 ,2 4 7

0.00

0 268

0.00

0 208

AC CY CY LS LS LF LS EA EA EA EA EA LF SPACES SF EA LS LF LF SF

$5,000 $25 $30 $75,000 $859,500 $70 $2,050,318 $500,000 $100,000 $20,000,000 $50,000 $750,000 $350 $2,000 $15 $250,000 $800,000 $200 $15 $6

46 111,683 74,455 1 1 4,800 1 6 6 1 6 3 13,359 1,062 60,309 1 1 4,020 2,077 201,029 Sub-t ot al $ for 2 a

$230,728 $2,792,075 $2,233,650 $75,000 $859,500 $336,000 $2,050,318 $3,000,000 $600,000 $20,000,000 $300,000 $2,250,000 $4,675,800 $2,124,000 $904,632 $250,000 $800,000 $804,000 $31,155 $1,206,176 45,523,034

$54,627,641

$65,553,169

$78,273,913

3.70

171

20.00

923

AC CY CY LS LF LF LS EA EA EA EA LS LF SPACES EA LF LF LF AC

$5,000 $25 $30 $75,000 $75 $70 $1,709,937 $200,000 $125,000 $50,000 $750,000 $125,000 $350 $2,000 $10,000 $200 $200 $15 $6

106 128,563 27,564 1 8,650 8,550 1 14 4 18 8 1 13,383 1,141 4 8,934 3,306 9,534 231,413 Sub-t ot al $ for 2 b

$531,250 $3,214,075 $826,914 $75,000 $648,750 $598,500 $1,709,937 $2,800,000 $500,000 $900,000 $6,000,000 $125,000 $4,683,970 $2,282,000 $40,000 $893,400 $330,636 $143,010 $1,388,475 27,690,917

$33,229,100

$39,874,920

$50,512,356

3.70

393

12.00

1,275

LF CY LF LS LF LF

$15 $200 $15 $50,000 $600 $20,000

5,909 688 312 1 300 100 Sub-t ot al for 2 c Tot al $ for 2 a, 2 b & 2 c

$88,635 $137,600 $4,684 $50,000 $180,000 $2,000,000 2,460,919 75,674,870

$2,953,103 $ 9 0 ,8 0 9 ,8 4 4

$3,543,723 $ 1 0 8 ,9 7 1 ,8 1 3

$3,872,322 $ 1 3 2 ,6 5 8 ,5 9 0

3.70

150 714

0.78

32 2 ,2 3 0

Acres EA LF CY CY LF LF LS SF

$10,000 $50 $25 $5 $200 $15 $300,000 $2

5 2,706 10,648 1,065 6,718 7,576 1 591,998 Sub-t ot al $ for 3 a

Acres CY CY EA LF LF SF

$50,000 $135,288 $266,200 $5,324 $1,343,600 $113,640 $300,000 $1,183,996 3,398,048

$4,077,658

$4,893,189

$5,507,327

3.70

201

2.00

109

$25 $5 $10,000 $15 $200 $2

32,141 3,214 5 1,100 387 172,309 Sub-t ot al $ for 3 b Tot al $ for 3 a & 3 b

$803,519 $16,070 $50,000 $16,500 $77,400 $344,618 1,308,107 4,706,155

$1,569,728 $ 5 ,6 4 7 ,3 8 6

$1,883,674 $ 6 ,7 7 6 ,8 6 3

$2,120,092 $ 7 ,6 2 7 ,4 1 9

3.70

59 260

0.78

12 121

A cr e s Existing Area is a Gun Range

A cr e s Use or Capacity does not Change

Acres LS

$200,000

1 Sub-t ot al $ for 5

A cr e s 49.66 Existing Area is Undeveloped

A cr e s 49.66 Area becomes leasable to the archery range

Acres LS

$200,000 $200,000

$240,000

$288,000

$333,871

3.00

235

3.00

235

$250,000

1.00 Sub-t ot al $ for 6

$250,000 $250,000 $ 4 5 0 ,0 0 0

$300,000 $ 5 4 0 ,0 0 0

$360,000 $ 6 4 8 ,0 0 0

$417,339 $ 7 5 1 ,2 1 0

1.00

50 285

1.00

50 285

With Soft Costs

With Contingency

With Escalation

$98,115,133

$110,251,849

$132,302,218

$162,037,466

To tal Acres f o r 5a & 5b Cost Assumptions to the right have been added into costs above

A cr e s 140.47 Existing Area is Conservation Borrow Site: 1e

Cut Site Sent to:

No rthwest o f Eu clid

5.2 Convert Undeveloped Area into Baffled Archery Range 19 Put in New Lease Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 5

EA LF LF SF

A cr e s 55.61 Future Area with be Restored Open Space

A cr e s Existing Area is a Golf Course

No rth and So u th o f Pine Ave / East o f Eu clid

4.1 New Signal at Euclid and Pomona Rincon Road 19 Put in New Lease Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 5

Sent to Fill Site:

A cr e s 55.61 Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space

To tal Acres f o r 3a & 3b

$15 $200,000 $25 $5 $3

Conce ssi onai r e

No rth and So u th o f Pine Ave / East o f Eu clid

Upgraded Existing Cart Path Bridges (new Railing & Surface) 1 Upgraded Multi-use Trails (assumes 50% covered by cart paths) 1 Would be Paid for NA Mass Cut Trucked to Nearby Fill Sites (-5' over 50% of acres) by Concession Deal Poor Fill Material Exported (assumes 10% of cut) New Multi-use Trails (assumes 50% already covered by cart paths) 1 for the Soccer Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Complex Tunnel under Pine Avenue (10' x 100') 1 Upland Restoration with Irrigation, Fencing & Signage (25%) 2&9 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 4

2a + 2b

LF LS CY CY SF

A cr e s 124.36 Future Area with be Restored Open Space

Conce ssi onai r e

So u th o f Pine and West o f Eu clid

3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8

Unit Cost

A cr e s 13.76 Future Area with be Restored Open Space

To tal Ex isting Acres f o r 2a, 2b & 2c

Open Space / Creek Edges

Unit

Conce ssi onai r e

No rth & So u th o f Pine Ave East o f El Prado Rd

2.21 2.22 2.23 2.24 2.25 2.26 2.27 2.28 2.29 2.30 2.31 2.32 2.33 2.34 2.35 2.36 2.37 2.38 2.39

Added New Facilities

Quantity

Mitigation Banking

Immediately No rth o f Pine Ave East o f El Prado Rd

Tree, Debris & Turf Removal / Hauling NA Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 50% of acres) NA Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 25% of acres) NA Electrical Extensions NA Water Extensions / Connections to Fields NA Sewer Extensions / Connections to Fields NA Storm Drain Improvements NA Lighted Tournament Soccer Fields 23 & 25 Once Golf Course Fencing, Shade Shelters, Bleachers & Sports Field Equipment 23 & 25 Leaves and A Deal 3,500 Capacity Soccer Arena and Special Event Center 23 & 25 with a Walkway & Building Security Lighting Only NA Concessionaire is Restroom Buildings NA Finalized Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA Parking Lots (Asphalt, curb stops, planters, trees and lighting) NA General Plaza and Paved Walkways (Assumes 3%) 4 Traffic Signal and Left Turn Lane Additions / Widening NA Champion Park with Restroom, Plazas & Landscaping 4 Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 General Landscaping and Irrigation (10% of total area) NA Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 6

Future Conditions Unit

A cr e s 13.76 Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space

To tal Acres

Active Sports / Soccer Tournament Center

Quantity

Tot al Exi st i ng Acr e s al l Ar e as

128.08

797.89

Acres f o r 5a & 5b Tot al Fut ur e Acr e s al l Ar e as

128.08

To tal Acres f o r 5a & 5b

797.89

Grand Total for All Areas

Tot al Exi st i ng Tr i ps pe r Day

1,527

Total Future Trips per Day

2,843

Table 8-3: North Central Study Area Conceptual Estimate NOR TH CENTR A L A R EA PR A DO R EGIONA L PA R K MA STER PLA N ID Gener al Land Us e Des cr iption Active Recreation- Northwest Pond

6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5

Active Recreation- Northeast Pond 6b

Active Recreation- East Pond 6c

Active Sports / Sport Fields & Courts

Sequence Order Location No rthwest o f Po nd

Survey Rank

Phasing

Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Multi-use path Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1,15 is the highest 10' Concrete Walkway On Street Edge 1 Upgraded Restrooms NA priority New Infill Picnic Areas 4 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 8 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 This area is Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1,15 second priority Concrete Walkway On Street Edge 1 for Upgraded Restrooms NA Additional Playgrounds 10 improvements New Infill Picnic Areas 4 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 8

6.12 6.13 6.14 6.15 6.16

Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 After Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1,15 equestrian Upgraded Ballfields 24 center Upgraded Restrooms 25 improvements New Infill Picnic Areas 4 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 8

24 6.21 Upgraded Ballfields 6.22 New Infill Picnic Areas 4 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

After equestrian 3

No rtheast Co rner o f Park

Unit

8b 8c 8d

25.97

Single-User Lease- Boat / Fishing Rentals

8.1 8.2 Low I mpact O pe n Space - Ri p Rap 8.3 Act i ve Re cr e at i on / O pe n Pond 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8

Aro u nd Po nd

25.97

Future Vehicle Trips per Day

Unit

Unit Cost

Sub-total Cost

With Soft Costs

With

With Escalation

Trips per

Sub-Total

Trips per

Sub-Total

LF LF LF LS EA

$15 $200 $200 $25,000 $45,000

2,413 2,413 60 1 2 Sub-t ot al $ for 6 a

$36,200 $482,629 $12,000 $25,000 $90,000 $645,829

$774,994

$929,993

$1,178,087

0.78

1.96

653 2,079 40 1 2 2 Sub-t ot al $ for 6 b

Acres 32.07 Existing Area is Active Park

Acres 32.07 Future Area will be Active Park

Acres LF LF EA EA EA

$9,788 $415,814 $8,000 $25,000 $70,000 $90,000 $618,602

$742,322

$890,787

$1,128,422

0.78

1.96

$15 $200 $20,000 $35,000 $45,000

1,303 1,900 3 2 2 Sub-t ot al $ for 6 c

Acres EA EA

$19,550 $380,000 $60,000 $70,000 $90,000 $619,550

$743,460

$892,152

$1,130,151

0.78

1.96

$20,000 $45,000

3 2 Sub-t ot al for 6 d Sub-t ot al $ for 6 a t hr u 6 d

$60,000 $90,000 150,000 2 ,0 3 3 ,9 8 0

$180,000 $ 2 ,4 4 0 ,7 7 6

$216,000 $ 2 ,9 2 8 ,9 3 2

$236,029 $ 3 ,6 7 2 ,6 9 0

0.78

4 73

1.96

10 144

Sub-t ot al for 7 a

2.00

11 5,348 3,565 1 330 500 1 1 2 Sub-t ot al for 7 b

$55,699 $133,705 $106,964 $150,000 $24,750 $35,000 $147,324 $1,000,000 $400,000 1,547,324

$1,856,789

$2,228,147

$2,907,226

2.00

20.00

223

$295,848 $ 2 ,1 5 2 ,6 3 7

$355,018 $ 2 ,5 8 3 ,1 6 5

$376,639 $ 3 ,2 8 3 ,8 6 4

0.78

2 50

2.00

5 253

$296,907 $ 2 9 6 ,9 0 7

$356,288 $ 3 5 6 ,2 8 8

$377,986 $ 3 7 7 ,9 8 6

3.00

355 355

3.00

355 355

Count y

Acres

5.35

Acres

5.35

To tal Acres

99.51

To tal Acres

99.51

Count y

Conce ssi onai r e

Quantity

Existing Vehicle Trips per Day

$15 $200 $200 $25,000 $35,000 $45,000

Acres 12.89 Existing Area is Active Park

Acres

11.14

26.48

Acres 12.89 Future use will be Single Lease Equestrian

Acres

11.14

Future Area will be Horse Riding Area Fill Acres: 2.21 Fill Acres: 2.21

AC CY CY LS LF LF LS LS EA

$5,000 $25 $30 $150,000 $75 $70 $147,324 $1,000,000 $200,000

Acres 2.44 Future Area will be Equestrian Stables

Acres CY LF

$30 $75

3,943 1,710 Sub-t ot al for 7 c Tot al $ for 7 a t hr u 7 c

$118,290 $128,250 246,540 1,793,864

LF LF

$15 $200

1,087 148

$16,305 $29,571

LF LF LS LF LS

$15 $200 $50,000 $200 $75,000

Fu tu re Acres

26.48

Acres 118.18 Existing Area is Natural Area

Acres 118.18 Future Area will remain as Natural Area

Existing Area is Rip/Rap Slopes Existing Area is Open Pond

Future Area will remain as Rip/Rap Slopes Future Area will remain as Open Pond

Area has Existing Dock

Upgraded Docks

Area has Existing Rental Building

118.18

20% 20% 3%

Acres

Count y

Existing Natural Area- Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) (31.21 acres) NA Will depend on Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 lease and Existing Rip-Rap Area - No Improvements (25.45 acres) NA agreements Open Pond- Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) (59.70 acres) NA Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) since funding 1 Improved Docking and Pier Facilities (1.81 acres) 3 required by Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 concessionaire Upgrade the Concession Building for Aquatic Boats and Rentals 3 Conce ssi onai r e Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 2 Combined Design, Engineering, Environmental Review & Permitting Contingency (Considering Preliminary Nature of Concept) Annual Compounded Escalation Rate from 2020

Quantity

Adjustments

LF LF LF EA EA EA

To tal Ex isting Acres f o r 8a thru 8d Cost Assumptions to the right have been added into costs above

Unit

Acres 36.12 Future Area will be Active Park

Added New Facilities

Future Area will be Active Park

Existing Area is Active Park Tree, Debris & Turf Removal / Hauling NA Cut Site Brought from: Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 50% of acres) NA 12d Will depend on Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (50% of site for 2') NA Import from Offsite: lease and Electrical Extensions NA agreements Water Extensions / Connections to Fields NA since funding Sewer Extensions / Connections to Fields NA required by Storm Drain Improvements NA concessionaire 1,500 Capacity Horse Arena & Special Event Center 16 Riding Paddocks, Jumping Areas, Hotwalkers 16 Conce ssi onai r e Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 9 Acres Eastern Sho re o f Po nd 2.44 Single-User Lease- Equestrian Paddocks NA Existing Area is Active Park 7.10 Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (50% of site at 2') 7.11 6' Fencing Galvanized Chain Link with Wood Framing NA Conce ssi onai r e Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 2 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10

Future Conditions

Existing Area is Active Park

To tal Ex isting Acres f o r 7a thru 7c

Quantity

Acres 36.12 Existing Area is Active Park

Acres

No rth Side o f Po nd and West o f Jo hnso n

23 & 25 7.1 Existing Stable Area no-improvements Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

Existing Conditions

Count y

Eastern Sho re o f Po nd

Single-User Lease- Equest. Stable Area

Funding Source

No rtheast o f Po nd

6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11

Single-User Lease- Equest. Performance

Chapter 8: Implementation | 203

T o ta l E x i s ti n g Acres all Areas

244.17

Upgraded Rental Facility

Fu tu re Acres T o ta l F u tu r e Acres all Areas

118.18

164 57 1 314 1 Sub-t ot al for 8 a t hr u 8 d Tot al $ for 8 a t hr u 8 d

$2,460 $11,371 $50,000 $62,714 $75,000 247,422 247,422

With Soft Costs With Contingency With Escalation

244.17

Grand Total for All Areas

$4,075,267

$4,890,320

$5,868,384

$7,334,540

T o ta l E x i s ti n g Trips per Day

477

Total Future Trips per Day

752

Table 8-4: South Central Study Area Conceptual Estimate

204 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan SOUTH C EN TRAL AREA PRADO REGION AL PARK MASTER PLAN ID #

General Land Use Description

Low Impact Open Space - RV Camping (275 camp

9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 9.10 9.11 9.12 9.13 9.14 9.15 9.16

Low Impact OS- Primitive Tent Rentals (27 camp

9.20 9.21 9.22 9.23 9.24 9.25 9.26 9.27 9.28 9.29 9.30

Low Impact OS- Luxury Tent / Cabin Rentals (10

9.35 9.36 9.37 9.38 9.39 9.40 9.41 9.42 9.43 9.44 9.45

Low Impact OS- Tent / Cabin Rentals (15 camp

9.50 9.51 9.52 9.53 9.54 9.55 9.56 9.57 9.58 9.59 9.60

Low Impact OS-Existing Campgrounds (75 camp

9.61 9.62 9.63

Low Impact OS- Camp Support & Gathering (15

9.70 9.71 9.72 9.73 9.74 9.75 9.76 9.77 9.78 9.79 9.80 9.81 9.82

Sequence Order Location

Survey Rank

East of Eucl i d, Sout h of Pond Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 50% of acres) NA Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+6" for 50% of acres) NA Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA Electrical Extensions NA Water Extensions / Connections to Camping Spots NA Sewer Extensions / Connections to Camping Spots NA Storm Drain Improvements NA Campground Amenities 8 Rental Trailers 8 NA General Landscaping and Irrigation (25% of total area) General Ground Coverings and Mulches 25% of the total area) NA Restroom Facilities NA Parking Lots (Asphalt, curb stops, planters and trees ) 75% of lot NA Launching Ramp for Boats NA Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) Sout h of Pond Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 50% of acres) NA Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 50% of acres) NA Water Extensions / Connections to Campsites NA Campground Amenities 8 NA General Landscaping and Irrigation (10% of total area) Parking Lots (Asphalt, curb stops, planters and trees ) 25% of lot in 9a General Ground Coverings and Mulches 50% of the total area) NA Restroom Facilities (use RV Campground Restrooms) NA Pre-fab Steel Footbridge Across Creek (8' x 100') NA Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) Sout h of Pond Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 100% of acres) NA Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 50% of acres) NA Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA Water Extensions / Connections to Campsites NA Campground Amenities 8 Campground Cabins, Yurts and Eco-tents with internal restrooms 8 NA General Landscaping and Irrigation (25% of total area) General Ground Coverings and Mulches 50% of the total area) NA Parking Lots (DG, curb stops, planters and trees ) NA Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) Sout h of Pond Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 50% of acres) NA Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 50% of acres) NA Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA Water Extensions / Connections to Campsites NA Campground Amenities 8 Campground Cabins, Yurts and Eco-tents with internal restrooms 8 NA General Landscaping and Irrigation (25% of total area) General Ground Coverings and Mulches 50% of the total area) NA Parking Lots (Asphalt, curb stops, planters and trees NA Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) Sout h of Pond Restroom Building Upgrades 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 New Picnic Table / Shelter 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) Sout he ast of Pond Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 50% of acres) NA Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA Water Extensions / Connections for Irrigation NA Central Gazebo 4 and 9 Sand Volleyball Courts 9 NA Horseshoes Pickleball Courts NA Converted Multi-use Building into Youth Gaming Center NA New Construction for Camp / Bait Store NA Small Camp Amphitheater / Campfire Area 4 and 9 Parking Lots (Asphalt, curb stops, planters and trees ) NA Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

Phasing

Funding Source

Existing Conditions Unit

10a

10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.9 10.10 10.11 10.12 10.13 10.14 10.15 10.16

Unit

Quantity

Acres 3 4 .5 8 Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space Cut Brought from: 12d Import from Offsite:

Acres 3 4 .5 8 Future Area will be Campground Fill Acres: 28.94 Fill Acres: 28.94

A cr e s 1 4 .1 3 Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space Cut Brought from: 12d Import from Offsite:

A cr e s 1 4 .1 3 Future Area will be Campground Fill Acres: 5.53 Fill Acres: 5.53

A cr e s 1 5 .8 8 Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space Cut Brought from: 12d Import from Offsite:

A cr e s 1 5 .8 8 Future Area will be Campground Fill Acres: 6.00 Fill Acres: 6.00

A cr e s 5 .9 6 Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space Cut Brought from: 12d Import from Offsite:

A cr e s 5 .9 6 Future Area will be Campground Fill Acres: 3.69 Fill Acres: 3.69

A cr e s 3 4 .0 5 Existing Area is a Open Space Campground

A cr e s 3 4 .0 5 Future Area will be Campground

Recommend Other Camping Options be Provided as Initial Phase and have this Camp Area be more in the Future

County

Lowest Cost but Would Require Roadway and Bridge Across the Spillway, Recommend it be the third in the Sequence of Campgrounds 3

County

Since this is a unique camping opportunity, suggest that the Eco-tents on the hill be the First Phase to test demand. 4

County

Since this is a unique camping opportunity, suggest that the Eco-tents on the hill be the First Phase to test demand. 4

County

A cr e s A cr e s 4 .8 7 4 .8 7 Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space Future Area will be Campground Support Cut Brought from: Fill Acres: 12d 9.08 Import from Offsite: Fill Acres: 9.08

Will need to have this come at the same time as the RV campground on the West Side

County Tot al Acr e s

Low Impact OS- Nature Center & Garden (150

Quantity

Future Conditions

A cr e s 5 3 .3 6 Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space Cut Brought from: 12g Import from Offsite:

Sout h of Campgr ound

NA Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 50% of acres) NA Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+6" for 50% of acres) NA Roadways (25' wide DG Surface) NA Electrical Extensions NA Water Extensions / Connections to Gardens NA Sewer Extensions / Connections to Gardens NA When Funds are Storm Drain Improvements NA Available or Nature Center Drop-off and Parking Lot (DG Lot and Drop-off) NA Grants Nature Center Building 5, 6 & 18 Obtained Nature Gardens with Trails, Irrigation, Plants, Signs & Benches (15%) 2,5 & 9 Pre-fab Steel Footbridge Across Creek (8' x 50') NA Invasive Species Removal NA Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Upland Restoration including Irrigation, Fencing & Signage (25%) 2 Lowland Restoration including Irrigation, Fencing & Signage (25%) 2 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 5

1 0 9 .4 6

Tot al Acr e s

Gr ant s Tot al Acr e s

5 3 .3 6

Tot al Acr e s

Unit

Unit Cost

Sub-total Cost

With Soft Costs

CY CY LF LS LF LF LS SITES SITES SF SF EA SPACE LS LF LF

$25 $30 $350 $50,000 $75 $70 $381,752 $1,500 $75,000 $6 $0.25 $750,000 $2,000 $75,000 $200 $15

70,035 11,672 7,947 1 590 630 1 238 37 376,568 376,568 5 75 1 2,699 3,343 Sub-t ot al $ for 9 a

$1,750,870 $350,174 $2,781,570 $50,000 $44,250 $44,100 $381,752 $357,000 $2,775,000 $2,259,407 $94,142 $3,750,000 $150,000 $75,000 $539,786 $50,140 $15,453,191

$18,543,829

$22,252,595

CY CY LF SITES SF SPACE SF EA SPACE LF LF

$25 $30 $75 $1,500 $6 $2,000 $0.25 $750,000 $400,000 $200 $15

13,383 4,461 967 27 61,571 25 61,571 0 1 1,951 1,103 Sub-t ot al $ for 9 b

$334,565 $133,826 $72,525 $40,500 $369,424 $50,000 $15,393 $0 $400,000 $390,100 $16,538 $1,822,870

$2,187,444

CY CY LF LF SITES SITES SF SF SPACE LF LF

$25 $30 $350 $75 $3,000 $50,000 $6 $0.25 $750 $200 $15

29,040 12,806 205 1,203 10 10 172,883 172,883 82 512 3,194 Sub-t ot al $ for 9 c

$726,000 $384,185 $71,630 $90,225 $30,000 $500,000 $1,037,299 $43,221 $61,500 $102,329 $47,905 $3,094,293

CY CY LF LF SITES SITES SF SF SPACE LF LF

$25 $30 $350 $75 $3,000 $50,000 $6 $0.25 $2,000 $200 $15

8,930 2,977 1,073 594 15 15 64,902 64,902 25 631 1,774 Sub-t ot al $ for 9 d

$223,245 $89,298 $375,400 $44,550 $45,000 $750,000 $389,410 $16,225 $50,000 $126,271 $26,608 $2,136,008

EA LF EA

$25,000 $15 $45,000

2 1,627 4 Sub-t ot al $ for 9 e

$50,000 $24,405 $180,000 $254,405

CY LF LF EA EA EA EA LS SF LS SPACES LF LF

$30 $350 $75 $50,000 $10,000 $1,000 $100,000 $200,000 $400 $100,000 $2,000 $200 $15

7,325 252 180 1 1 3 8 1 2,500 1 15 231 103 Sub-t ot al $ for 9 f Sub-t ot al $ for 9 a t hr u 9 f

$219,736 $88,330 $13,500 $50,000 $10,000 $3,000 $800,000 $200,000 $1,000,000 $100,000 $30,000 $46,243 $1,548 $2,562,356 $ 2 5 ,3 2 3 ,1 2 2

CY CY LF LS LF LF LS SPACES SF SF LF SF LF LF SF SF

$25 $30 $150 $50,000 $75 $70 $349,212 $750 $500 $5 $200,000 $0.25 $200.00 $15.00 $2 $3

129,135 21,522 6,605 1 2,145 1,950 1 150 19,000 348,663 2 2,324,422 3,117 11,019 581,105 581,105 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 0 a Sub-t ot al $ for 1 0 a

$3,228,363 $645,673 $990,714 $50,000 $160,875 $136,500 $349,212 $112,500 $9,500,000 $1,743,316 $400,000 $581,105 $623,400 $165,285 $1,162,211 $1,743,316 $21,592,471 $ 2 1 ,5 9 2 ,4 7 1

1 0 9 .4 6

A cr e s 5 3 .3 6 Future Area will be Nature Center Fill Acres: 9.08 Fill Acres: 9.08

5 3 .3 6

Adjustments

Added New Facilities Quantity

Existing Vehicle Trips per Day

Contingency With Escalation

Future Vehicle Trips per Day

Trips per

Sub-Total Trips

Trips per

Sub-Total Trips

$27,367,884

0.00

12.00

415

$2,624,933

$2,868,335

0.00

12.00

170

$3,713,151

$4,455,781

$5,015,021

0.00

12.00

191

$2,563,209

$3,075,851

$3,461,897

0.00

12.00

$305,286

$366,343

$412,322

12.00

409

12.00

409

$3,074,828 $ 3 0 ,3 8 7 ,7 4 6

$3,689,793 $ 3 6 ,4 6 5 ,2 9 6

$4,277,482 $ 4 3 ,4 0 2 ,9 4 1

0.00

0 409

20.00

97 1 ,3 5 2

$25,910,965 $ 2 5 ,9 1 0 ,9 6 5

$31,093,158 $ 3 1 ,0 9 3 ,1 5 8

$36,045,492 $ 3 6 ,0 4 5 ,4 9 2

0.00

0 0

10.00

534 534

Table 8-5: South Central Study Area Conceptual Estimate Continued SOUTH C EN TRAL AREA PRADO REGION AL PARK MASTER PLAN ID #

General Land Use Description

Special Event- Obstacle Course

11a

11b

Special Event- Fields for Sporting Events

11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8 11.9 11.10 11.11 11.12 11.13 11.14 11.15

Special Event- Amphitheater (1,500 Parking)

11.16 11.17 11.18 11.19 11.20 11.21 11.22 11.23 11.24 11.25 11.26 11.27 11.28 11.29 11.30 11.31 11.32 11.33 11.34 11.35 11.36 11.37

11c

11d

12a 12b 12c

12d

12e 12f

12g

12h 12i

13a 13b

Single Lease- Model Airplane Runway

11.38 11.39

Conservation 1 / Excavation & Habitat Sites

Conservation 1 Conversion of Open Space 12.1 Conservation 1 - Existing 12.2 Conservation 1 Existing -Nature Center Area Conservation 1 Enhanced Creek Corridor 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.7 12.8 Conservation 1- Existing Wetlands Conservation 1- Existing Main Riparian Areas Converted Open Space to Conservation 12.10 12.11 12.12 12.13 12.14 12.15 Enhanced Conservation 1/Invasive Removals Mill Creek Existing Conservation Area 12.15

Agricultural Leases

13c 1 4 a Single Lease- Hunting Dog Training Area

13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 14.1

Cost Assumptions to the right have been added into costs above

Sequence Order Location

Survey Rank

Sout h of Exi st i ng Campgr ound NA Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 50% of acres) Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 50% of acres) High Ropes Course NA Low Ropes Course NA Climbing Wall NA Climbing Logs NA Mud Obstacle and Sliding Tower 23 & 25 Balance Beams 23 & 25 Climbing Ropes 23 & 25 Jumping Pillows with Shade Structure NA Zip Lines with Towers and Cables NA Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 General Landscaping and Irrigation (5% of total area) NA Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) East of Cucamonga Ave . and Sout h of Exi st i ng Campgr ound Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1, 27 Dirt Road Extensions (25' wide DG surface) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) Sout he ast of Exi st i ng Campgr ound Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+5' over 50% of acres) NA Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 50% of acres) NA Electrical Extensions NA Water Extensions / Connections to the Amphitheater NA Sewer Extensions / Connections to the Amphitheater NA Storm Drain Improvements NA Amphitheater Stage 4, 12 & 22 Amphitheater Seating 4, 12 & 22 Amphitheater Upper Lawn and Noise Berm 4, 12 & 22 Restroom Buildings NA Amphitheater Lighting NA 10' High Black Vinyl Fencing with Wood Frame & Screening Slats NA Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA New Gate House with Lighting NA Multi-use Bldg. and Support Facility Parking Lot (Asphalt, curb stops, planters, trees and lighting) NA Overflow Parking (decomposed granite surface with curb stops) NA Chain-link Gates for Overflow Parking NA Cucamonga Widening (1 new lane each side / bike lane=17' x 2) NA Multi-use Trails (assumes 50% covered by cart paths) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 General Landscaping and Irrigation (10%) NA Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) East of Cucamonga Ave . Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1, 27 Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) Sout h of Pond Lowland Restoration utilizing Groundwater for Establishment (@ Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite)

Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) No Changes to this area Mass Cut Trucked to Nearby Fill Sites (-5' over 25% of acres) Poor Fill Material Exported (assumes 10% of cut) Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) Invasive Species Removal (20%) Upland Restoration including Irrigation, Fencing & Signage (25%) Lowland Restoration including Irrigation, Fencing & Signage (25%) Roadways (35' wide asphalt) No Changes to this area

Phasing

Chapter 8: Implementation | 205 Funding Source

Will depend on concessionaire lease and interest. Could be part of Prop. 70 Lands lease / concession opp

Conce ssi onai r e

Minimal Improvements 7

Conce ssi onai r e

Existing Conditions Unit

Quantity

Future Conditions Unit

Quantity

A cr e s 2 .5 1 Existing Area is Disturbed Open Space Cut Brought from: 12g Import from Offsite:

A cr e s 2 .5 1 Future Use is an Obstacle Course Fill Acres: 2.51 Fill Acres: 2.51

Acres 5 2 .0 5 Existing Area used for Special Events

Acres 5 2 .0 5 Future Use is for Special Events

Acres 6 5 .5 4 Existing Area is Disturbed Open Space Cut Brought from: 12g Import from Offsite:

Acres 6 5 .5 4 Future Use is an Amphitheater Fill Acres: 25.03 Fill Acres: 25.03

Will require a large amount of environmental review, traffic mitigations and approvals so this may need to be a mid-term phased project

10 Minimal Improvements 4

Added New Facilities Unit

Unit Cost

Quantity

Sub-total Cost

With Soft Costs

CY CY EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA LF SF

$25 $30 $75,000 $50,000 $25,000 $15,000 $75,000 $10,000 $10,000 $75,000 $25,000 $15 $6

6,074 2,025 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 297 5,475 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 1 a

$151,855 $60,742 $75,000 $50,000 $25,000 $15,000 $75,000 $10,000 $10,000 $75,000 $125,000 $4,455 $32,852 709,904

$851,885

$1,022,261

LF LF

$25 $150

4,351 500 Sub-t ot al for 1 1 c

$108,775 $75,000 183,775

$220,530

$313,000 $112,950 $1,712,953 25,019,420 $10,550 $269,600 269,600 $26,182,699

CY CY LS LF LF LS LS LS LS EA LS LF LF LS SF SPACES SF EA LF LF AC

Conce ssi onai r e

Acres 1 9 .4 3 Existing Area used for Hobby Planes Conce ssi onai r e Tot al Exi st i ng Acr e s for 1 1 a t hr u 1 1 cd

1 3 9 .5 4

Fut ur e Acr e s

$25 264,345 $30 52,869 $100,000 1 $75 5,305 $70 5,315 $750,087 1 $750,000 1 $750,000 1 $2,000,000 1 $750,000 4 $300,000 1 $80 1,204 $350 13,500 $125,000 1 $300 3,000 $2,000 136 $40 3,500 $2,500 3 See 22c on East Study Area $200 3,130 $15 7,530 $6 285,492 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 1 b

LF LF

$25 $200

SF LF

$3 $15

$15

1 3 9 .5 4

2,5

Acres

2.36

1,2

Acres

74.67

1,2 1 1

Acres Acres

7.17 25.44 Borrow Site:

12d

Sent to Fill Site: 7b, 9a, 9b, 9c, 9d +9f

Acres Acres Acres

7.65 250.64 55.65 Cut Brought from:

CY CY LF SF SF SF LF

$25 $5 $15 $0.25 $2 $3 $350

12g

Sent to Fill Site:

CY CY SF LF SF SF SF LF LF

$25 $5 $0.25 $15.00 $2 $3 $0.25 $200.00 $15

1 1 1 1 1,2 1,2 1 1

Mass Cut Trucked to Nearby Fill Sites (-5' over 25% of acres) Poor Fill Material Exported (assumes 10% of cut) Invasive Species Removal (20%) 2,5 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Upland Restoration including Irrigation, Fencing & Signage (25%) 2,5 Lowland Restoration including Irrigation, Fencing & Signage (25%) 2,5 Invasive Species Removal (20%) 1,2 Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1, 2 Tot al Exi st i ng Acr e s for 1 2 a t hr u 1 2 i We st of Cucamonga Ave . and East of Eucl i d No Changes to this area No Changes to this area Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 East of Eucl i d No Improvements Tot al Exi st i ng Acr e s for 1 3 a t hr u 1 4 a 20% Combined Design, Engineering, Environmental Review & Permitting 20% Contingency (Considering Preliminary Nature of Concept) 3% Annual Compounded Escalation Rate from 2020

Acres Acres Acres Acres

Future Use is Habitats & Trails

10a, 11a +11b

29.98

Acres Acres 4

Open Space

Acres 1 9 .4 3 Future Use is for Hobby Planes

Mi t i gat i on

County

22.33 4 7 5 .8 9 50.50 21.44 243.32 244.32

LF LF

97.06 6 5 6 .6 4 Tot al Exi st i ng Acr e s al l Ar e as

$15.00 $200.00

422 1,348 Sub-t ot al for 1 1 d Tot al $ for 1 1 a t hr u 1 1 d

Tot al Fut ur e Acr e s al l Ar e as

1,435

Trips per

Sub-Total Trips

$1,150,564

0.00

15.00

$264,636

$325,469

0.00

0.50

$30,023,304

$36,027,965

$48,418,572

0.00

34.00

2,228

$323,520 $ 3 1 ,4 1 9 ,2 3 9

$388,224 $ 3 7 ,7 0 3 ,0 8 6

$436,950 $ 5 0 ,3 3 1 ,5 5 5

5.00

97 97

6.00

117 2 ,4 0 9

$16,951,478

$20,341,774

$24,410,129

2.00 $267,930 With Soft Costs

$321,516 Contingency

$385,819 With Escalation

194 194

2.00

$223,275

194 194

$ 8 7 ,4 4 7 ,7 9 9

$ 1 0 4 ,6 6 9 ,4 2 9

$ 1 2 5 ,6 0 3 ,3 1 4

$ 1 5 4 ,1 9 0 ,1 1 7

Tot al Exi st i ng Tr i ps pe r Day

700

Total Future Trips per Day

3 ,1 3 6

$6,608,617 $1,586,068 $100,000 $397,875 $372,050 $750,087 $750,000 $750,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $300,000 $96,320 $4,725,000 $125,000 $900,000 $272,000 $140,000 $7,500

134,060 13,406 1,561 221,645 387,879 443,290 66 0

$3,351,498 $67,030 $23,415 $55,411 $775,758 $1,329,871 $23,020

6,232 649

Grand Total for All Areas

Contingency With Escalation

Future Vehicle Trips per Day

Sub-Total Trips

$76,978 $16,485

134,060 13,406 484,864 3,639 848,513 969,729 261,193 505 2,513 Tot al $ for 1 2 a t hr u 1 2 i

Existing Vehicle Trips per Day Trips per

25,659 1,099 0 149 0

Tot al $ for 1 3 a t hr u 1 4 a

1,435

Adjustments

$2,230

$3,351,500 $67,030 $121,216 $54,585 $1,697,025 $2,909,186 $65,298 $101,000 $37,695 14,126,232

$93,475 $129,800

Table 8-6: East Side Study Area Conceptual Estimate

206 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan EAST SIDE STUDY AREA (PROP 70)

Sequence Order

PRADO REGION AL PARK MASTER PLAN ID #

15a

Ge ne ral Land Use De scri p ti on

Location

Active Recreation: Existing Paintball Park

West o f Hellman

Phasing

15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6 15.7 15.8 15.9 15.10 15.11 15.12 15.13 15.14 15.15

15b

Active Recreation- Extreme Adventure Zone 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.7 16.8 16.9 16.10 16.11 16.12 16.13 16.14 16.15 16.16 16.17 16.17 16.18 16.19

16a

Active Recreation- Blue Zone Swimming Facility 17.1 17.2 17.3 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.7 17.8 17.9 17.10 17.11 17.12 17.13 17.14 17.15 17.16 17.17 17.18 17.19 17.20 17.21 17.22

17a

Active Recreation- Down on the Farm

Unit

2 Concession / Prop. 70 West o f Hellman Acres Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3 over 50% of acres) NA Cut Brought from: Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 50% of acres) NA Import from Offsite: Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA Electrical Extensions NA Water Extensions / Connections NA Depends on lease Sewer Extensions / Connections NA interest or expansion Storm Drain Improvements NA interest to current operator of the paint New Entry Gate NA ball park. 8' Black Vinyl Chain Link Fence with Wood Framing NA Buffer Landscaping (5% of lease) NA Create new Paint Ball Park Areas 10 Restroom Facilities NA Parking Lots (Asphalt, curb stops, planters and trees ) 75% of lot NA Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 2 Concession / Prop. 70

East o f Cu camo nga, No rth o f McCarty & West o f Hellman

Acres

Quantity

15.79 12d

41.78

Future Conditions Unit

Quantity

26.22 Acres Future use is Paint Ball Park

Acres Fill Acres: Fill Acres:

15.79

Acres

41.78

15.77 15.77

Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 50% of acres) NA Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space Future Area will be 'Active Adventure Area Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 50% of acres) NA Cut Brought from: 12d Fill Acres: 31.64 Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA Import from Offsite: Fill Acres: 31.64 Water Extensions / Connections Snack Shack NA Sewer Extensions / Connections Snack Shack and Restroom NA General Landscaping and Irrigation (25% of total area) NA General Ground Coverings and Mulches 30% of the total area) NA Restroom Facilities NA Parking Lots (Asphalt, curb stops, planters and trees) NA May need to be Course Mounding and Jumps 10, 13, 15, 26 grouped lease in Pump Track 10, 13, 15, 26 conjunction with the paint ball lease. Skate Park 10, 13, 15, 26 High Ropes Course 10, 13, 15, 26 Low Ropes Course 10, 13, 15, 26 Pond Creation 4 Multi-use Park and Field 4 6' Black Vinyl Chain Link Fence with Wood Framing NA Gazebo Plaza 4 Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 4 Concession / Prop. 70

East o f Cu camo nga, No rth o f McCarty & West o f Hellman Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+3' over 50% of acres) NA Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 50% of acres) NA Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA Parking Lots (Asphalt, curb stops, planters and trees) NA Electrical Extensions NA Water Extensions / Connections NA Sewer Extensions / Connections NA Storm Drain Improvements NA Entry Building Check-in and Changing Room with Restrooms NA Pump House and Water Quality Control Building NA Wading Pool 11 & 14 Recreation Open Pool 12 & 14 Competitive Pool 13 & 14 Lazy River and Lagoon 14 & 14 High Slides 15 & 14 Low Slides 16 & 14 Spraygrounds 17 & 14 Deck Areas 18 & 14 Shade Shelters 19 & 14 6' Black Vinyl Chain Link Fence with Wood Framing NA General Landscaping and Irrigation (10% of total area) 19 & 14 Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

Acres

Compacted Fill from Nearby Cuts (+5' over 50% of acres) NA Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 50% of acres) NA Roadways (35' wide asphalt) NA Parking Lots (Asphalt, curb stops, planters and trees) NA Electrical Extensions NA Water Extensions / Connections NA Sewer Extensions / Connections NA Storm Drain Improvements NA Entry Plaza and Gates NA Silos and Replica Barn as Check in and Leasable Space 4 Water Tower with Bungee Jumping and Customer Access 4 , 7 & 10 Silo climbing walls, dousing ponds and internal slides 4 , 7 & 10 Tot-lot playground 4 , 7 & 10 Silo Super slide with three silos 4 , 7 & 10 Children's playground around Silo Slide 4 , 7 & 10 Adult Exercise Shed 4 , 7 & 10 Sand Volleyball Courts 4 , 7 & 10 BBQ Eating Facility with Tent Covered Picnic Tables 4 , 7 & 10 Produce Eating Facility with Tent Covered Picnic Tables 4 , 7 & 10 Crop Sculpture and Corn Maize Fun Field Areas 4 , 7 & 10 Pond, Boardwalk and Associated Event Structures 4 , 7 & 10 Greenhouse Special Event Center 4 , 7 & 10 Tethered Hot Air Balloon 4 , 7 & 10 6' Black Vinyl Chain Link Fence with Wood Framing NA General Area Lighting NA General Landscaping and Irrigation (5% of total area) NA Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

28.27

Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space Cut Brought from: 12d Import from Offsite:

Acres

Unit Cost

LS LF

$10,000.00 $15.00

1 1,397 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 5 a

$10,000 $20,955 20,955

$25,146

$30,175

CY CY LF LS LF LF LS LS LF SF EA EA SPACE

$25 $30 $350 $50,000 $75 $70 $138,498 $25,000 $50 $6 $25,000 $500,000 $2,000

38,163 6,369 1,537 1 750 750 1 1 1,709 34,392 6 3 173 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 5 b

$954,085 $191,067 $538,080 $50,000 $56,250 $52,500 $138,498 $25,000 $85,450 $206,353 $150,000 $1,500,000 $346,000 $3,148,131

$3,777,757

76,569 25,523 2,562 200 200 454,956 545,947 2 85 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 3,787 1 2,974 5,520 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 6 a

$1,914,220 $765,688 $896,780 $15,000 $14,000 $2,729,734 $136,487 $1,000,000 $170,000 $125,000 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $50,000 $60,000 $100,000 $113,610 $75,000 $44,610 $82,800 $8,592,929

65,582 21,861 4,804 462 1 1 1 1 2,500 1 2,500 5,200 14,025 1 3 3 3 10,000 15 3,092 123,156 4,065 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 7 a

41,721 13,907 5,371 328 1 1,895 1,925 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 115,329 1 15,000 1 4,046 1 38,967 1,743 Sub-t ot al $ for 1 8 a Sub-t ot al $ for 1 5 t hr u 1 8 a

CY CY LF LF LF SF SF EA SPACE LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LF LS LF LF

Quantity

17.89

Future Area will be Aquatic Park Fill Acres: 27.10 Fill Acres: 27.10

Existing Area is a Disturbed Open Space Cut Brought from: 12d Import from Offsite:

Acres

$25 $30 $350 $75 $70 $6 $0 $500,000 $2,000 $125,000 $50,000 $100,000 $75,000 $25,000 $20,000 $100,000 $30 $75,000 $15 $15

Future Area will be Farm Theme Park Fill Acres: 17.24 Fill Acres: 17.24

Concession / Prop. 70

144.48

To tal Acres

Sub-total Cost

Existing Vehicle Trips per Day

With Soft Costs With Contingency With Escalation

Future Vehicle Trips per Day

Trips per

Sub-Total Trips

Trips per

Sub-Total Trips

$32,013

3.00

$4,533,308

$4,809,387

0.00

30.00

474

$10,311,515

$12,373,818

$13,926,841

0.00

20.00

836

CY CY LF SPACES LS LS LS LS SF EA SF SF SF LS EA EA EA SF EA LF SF LF

$25 $30 $350 $2,000 $50,000 $447,150 $662,000 $1,258,887 $400 $250,000 $200 $200 $225 $750,000 $100,000 $75,000 $45,000 $25 $10,000 $30 $6 $15

$1,639,550 $655,820 $1,681,320 $924,000 $50,000 $447,150 $662,000 $1,258,887 $1,000,000 $250,000 $500,000 $1,040,000 $3,155,625 $750,000 $300,000 $225,000 $135,000 $250,000 $150,000 $92,760 $738,935 $60,975 $15,967,022

$19,160,427

$22,992,512

$26,654,623

0.00

80.00

2,262

$1,043,020 $417,208 $1,879,770 $656,000 $50,000 $142,125 $134,750 $653,203 $25,000 $350,000 $100,000 $200,000 $50,000 $150,000 $50,000 $20,000 $30,000 $125,000 $150,000 $57,665 $50,000 $1,500,000 $75,000 $121,380 $25,000 $233,803 $26,145 $8,315,069 3 6 ,0 4 4 ,1 0 6

$9,978,083 4 3 ,2 5 2 ,9 2 7

$11,973,699 5 1 ,9 0 3 ,5 1 3

$13,083,985 5 8 ,5 0 6 ,8 4 8

0.00

0 79

13.71

245 3 ,8 9 5

17.89

A lease such as this could be done in phases or all at once. Suggest that it could be done along with the other leases but may depend on finding investors or operators.

To tal Acres

Adjustments

Unit

Concession / Prop. 70

Acres

Added New Facilities

28.27

This will take longer to complete feasibility studies, financial analysis and interest from the development community.

East o f Cu camo nga, No rth o f McCarty & West o f Hellman 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 18.6 18.7 18.8 18.9 18.10 18.11 18.12 18.13 18.14 18.15 18.16 18.17 18.18 18.19 18.20 18.21 18.22 18.23 18.24 18.25 18.26 18.27

Existing Conditions 26.22 Acres Existing Area is Paint Ball Park

15.1 Remove improvements from south side of McCarty Road NA 15.2 Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

Active Recreation- New Paint Ball Park

18a

Survey Rank

Funding Source

144.48

CY CY LF SPACES LS LF LF LS LS LS LS LS SF LS LS LS EA SF EA SF LS SF LS LF LS SF LF

$25 $30 $350 $2,000 $50,000 $75 $70 $653,203 $25,000 $350,000 $100,000 $200,000 $50,000 $150,000 $50,000 $20,000 $10,000 $125,000 $150,000 $0.5 $50,000 $100 $75,000 $30 $25,000 $6 $15

Table 8-7: East Side Study Area Conceptual Estimate, Continued 19a

Low Impact Open Space- Agriculture

Chapter 8: Implementation | 207

West o f Hellman 19.1 No costs need to be identified, just a placeholder for 10 acres

Low Impact Open Space

10.64 Acres Existing Area is Disturbed Open Space

To tal Acres Acres

East o f Cu camo nga, No rth o f McCarty & West o f Hellman 20.1 20.2 20.3 20.4 20.5 20.6

20a

Refined Grading / Top Fill Importing (+1' for 25% of acres) NA This needs to be done Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 with the Aquatic Park, Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 Paint Ball and Invasive Species Removal (25% of acres) NA Adventure Parks for Water Extensions / Connections to Open Space Areas NA sequencing. General Landscaping and Irrigation (5% of total area) NA Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 3

Existing Area is Disturbed Open Space Cut Brought from: 12d

Conservation 1

West o f Hellman and No rth o f McCarty 21.1 Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 2&5 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

Conservation 1: Restoration from Paintball Area 21.5 21.6 21.7 21.8 21.9 21.10

21b

Conservation 1: Conversion for Pond Area 21.10 21.11 21.12 21.13 21.14 21.15

21c

21d

Conservation 1: Southeast Side

NA 3

Acres

Mass Grading using Nearby Cuts (-5' over 100% of acres) NA Not essential to do Poor Fill Material Exported (assumes 10% of cut) right away but could Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 1 play role in stormwater runoff for Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) 1 the rest of the Prop. 70 Invasive Species Removal (10% of acres) NA area. Lowland Restoration utilizing Groundwater for Establishment (25%) 2&5 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 3 Mitigation Banking

22b

22c

Circulation- Hellman Road Expansion

West o f Hellman

Existing Area is Disturbed Agriculture Borrow Site: 21c

Acres

Circulation- Cucamonga Road Expansion

$30 $15 $15 $0.25 $75 $2

To tal Acres

14.53 87.57

Acres Future Use is Conservation 1

$15

4.87 Acres Future Use is Conservation 1 Sent to Fill Site:

CY CY SF SF SF SF

$25 $5 $1 $3 $0.25 $3

37.69 Acres Future Use is Conservation 1 Sent to Fill Site:

25.53 Acres Future Use is Conservation 1 Fu tu re Acres Acres

CY CY LF LF SF SF

$25 $5 $15 $15 $0.25 $1

$15

155.66

Acres

Existing is Road Right of Way

Future is Road Right of Way

Fu tu re Acres

1,871 3,602 2,103 158,559 570 31,646 Sub-t ot al $ for 2 0 a Sub-t ot al $ for 1 9 and 2 0 a

$56,144 $27,015 $31,545 $39,640 $42,750 $63,293 $260,387 2 6 0 ,3 8 7

$312,464 3 1 2 ,4 6 4

$374,957 3 7 4 ,9 5 7

$409,725 4 0 9 ,7 2 5

0.00

0 0

0.78

11 11

1,562 Sub-t ot al $ for 2 1 a

$23,430 $23,430

$28,116

$33,739

$36,868

0.00

19,626 1,963 25,000 25,000 52,990 52,990 Sub-t ot al $ for 2 1 b

$490,645 $9,813 $25,000 $75,000 $13,247 $158,969 772,674

$927,209

$1,112,651

$1,180,411

0.00

304,033 30,403 1,430 2,984 164,178 410,444 Sub-t ot al $ for 2 1 c

$7,600,817 $152,016 $10,725 $44,765 $41,044 $410,444 8,259,812

$9,911,774

$11,894,129

$12,997,035

0.00

0.78

2,331 Sub-t ot al $ for 2 1 d Tot al $ for 2 1 a t hr u 2 1 d

$34,965 34,965 9 ,0 9 0 ,8 8 1

$41,958 $ 1 0 ,9 0 9 ,0 5 7

$50,350 $ 1 3 ,0 9 0 ,8 6 8

$55,018 $ 1 4 ,2 6 9 ,3 3 3

0.00

0 0

0.78

20 49

LF LF

$20,000 $350

300 6,870 Sub-t ot al $ for 2 2 a

$6,000,000 $2,404,500 $8,404,500

$10,085,400

$12,102,480

$12,839,521

0.00

LF LF

$280 $15

4,230 1,500 Sub-t ot al $ for 2 2 b

$1,184,400 $22,500 $1,206,900

$1,448,280

$1,737,936

$1,843,776

0.00

3,054 1,500 Sub-t ot al $ for 2 2 b Tot al $ for 2 2 a

$855,120 $45,000 $900,120 1 0 ,5 1 1 ,5 2 0

$1,080,144 $ 1 2 ,6 1 3 ,8 2 4

$1,296,173 $ 1 5 ,1 3 6 ,5 8 9

$1,375,110 $ 1 6 ,0 5 8 ,4 0 7

0.00

0 0

0.00

0 0

With Soft Costs

With Contingency

With Escalation

Grand Total for All Areas

$55,906,893

$67,088,272

$80,505,926

$89,244,314

County

0.00

Future is Road Right of Way

Acres

Future is Road Right of Way

County

To tal Ex isting Acres f o r 22a Combined Design, Engineering, Environmental Review & Permitting Contingency (Considering Preliminary Nature of Concept) Annual Compounded Escalation Rate from 2020

Existing is Road Right of Way

On Cu camo nga

Cost Assumptions to the right have been added into costs above

CY LF LF SF LF SF

County

Acres

22.5 Expand Cucamonga Roadway 2 lanes with separate multi-use path (14') NA Roadway Widening Before Occupancy 22.6 Adjacent Multi-use Pathway on West Side (2-way @14') NA Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 2

155.66

Existing is Road Right of Way

On Hellman 22.5 Expand Hellman Roadway 2 lanes with separate multi-use path (14') NA Roadway Widening Before Occupancy 22.6 Adjacent Multi-use Pathway on West Side (2-way @14') NA Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 2

37.69

25.53 Acres Existing Area is Conservation 1

NA 3

22.1 McCarthy Rd. Bridge (two 12' lanes, two 5' bike lanes & two 5' walks) NA Roadway Widening Before Occupancy 22.2 McCarty Rd. Improvements (35' excludes bike lanes & side trail) NA Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 2

Future Use would be Open Space Fill Acres: 4.64

Sub-t ot al $ for 1 9 a

Mitigation Banking

West o f Hellman and No rth o f McCarty

Circulation- McCarty Rd. Expansion & Bridge

4.87

Existing Area is Disturbed Paintball Borrow Site: 21b

To tal Ex isting Acres f o r 21a thru 21d

22a

10.64 14.53

County Acres

21.15 Multi-use Trails (14' asphalt) 2&5 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year)

14.53 87.57

Acres Existing Area is Conservation 1

West o f Hellman and So u th o f McCarty Mass Grading using Nearby Cuts (-3' over 25% of acres) NA Poor Fill Material Exported (assumes 10% of cut) Prior to opening of Remove paint ball use areas south of McCarty Road NA new paintball park Restore riparian habitat as lowland species 2&9 expansion. Invasive Species Removal (25% of acres) NA Lowland Restoration utilizing Groundwater for Establishment 2&5 Projected Years (for cost estimating @3% compounded per year) 2

To tal Acres Acres

County

To tal Acres

21a

10.64 14.53

10.64 Acres Future Use is Agricultural Lease

0.00

LF LF

$280 $30

20% 20% 3%

T o ta l E x i s ti n g Acres all Areas

325.31

T o ta l F u tu r e Acres all Areas

325.31

T o ta l E x i s ti n g Trips per

Total Future Trips per Day

3,956

208 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

WEST STUDY AREA Element ID # 1a 1b 1c 1d 1e 2a 2b 2c

Future Acres 124.36 13.76 55.61 72.43 140.47 406.62

Future Trips 97 11 43 56 0 208

Sub-total Cost $4,133,216 $250,990 $6,661,310 $5,419,003 $819,589 $16,464,519

With Soft Costs $4,959,859 $301,188 $7,993,572 $6,502,804 $983,507 $19,757,423

With Contingency $5,951,831 $361,426 $9,592,287 $7,803,364 $1,180,208 $23,708,907

Projected Year 10 10 9 7 2

Totals

Existing Trips 0 0 0 268 0 268 171 393 150 714

46.15 106.25 40.61 193.01

923 1,275 32 2,230

$45,523,034 $27,690,917 $2,460,919 $75,674,870

$54,627,641 $33,229,100 $2,953,103 $90,809,844

$65,553,169 $39,874,920 $3,543,723 $108,971,813

6 8 3

Totals

46.15 106.25 40.61 193.01

$78,273,913 $50,512,356 $3,872,322 $132,658,590

201 59 260

54.36 15.82 70.18

109 12 121

$3,398,048 $1,308,107 $4,706,155

$4,077,658 $1,569,728 $5,647,386

$4,893,189 $1,883,674 $6,776,863

4 4

Totals

54.36 15.82 70.18

$5,507,327 $2,120,092 $7,627,419

78.42

235

72.43

235

$200,000

$240,000

$288,000

$333,871

50 285 1,527 Length in Miles 4.14 4.17 5.06

49.66 128.08 798

50 285 2,843

$250,000 $450,000 $97,295,544

$300,000 $300,000 $116,514,652

$360,000 $360,000 $139,817,583

$417,339 $417,339 $171,300,749

Existing Trips 28 20 0 0 73

Future Acres 36.12 25.97 32.07 5.35 99.51

Future Trips 71 0 63 10 144

Sub-total Cost $645,829 $618,602 $619,550 $150,000 $2,033,980

With Soft Costs $774,994 $742,322 $743,460 $180,000 $2,440,776

With Contingency $929,993 $890,787 $892,152 $216,000 $2,928,932

Projected Year 8 8 8 3

Totals

Existing Acres 36.12 25.97 32.07 5.35 99.51

With Escalation $1,178,087 $1,128,422 $1,130,151 $236,029 $3,672,690

26 22 2 50

12.89 11.14 2.44 26.48

26 223 5 253

$0 $1,547,324 $246,540 $1,793,864

$0 $1,856,789 $295,848 $2,152,637

$0 $2,228,147 $355,018 $2,583,165

0 9 2

Totals

12.89 11.14 2.44 26.48

$0 $2,907,226 $376,639 $3,283,864

355 752

$247,422 $247,422 $4,075,267

$296,907 $296,907 $4,890,320

$356,288 $356,288 $5,868,384

Open Space / Creek Edges Open Space / Creek Redevelopment

Single Purpose Lease- Gun Range

49.66 128.08 798 Length in Feet Multi-use paths (pedestrian, scooters, ebikes and bikes) 21,855 Soft Surface Trails (hikers, runners, mountain bikes and equestrian uses) 22,000 New Roadways 26,742 Single Purpose Lease- Archery Range

Totals TOTAL FOR THE WEST STUDY AREA

With Escalation $7,998,762 $485,726 $12,515,759 $9,597,154 $1,252,083 $30,597,401

NORTH CENTRAL STUDY AREA Element ID # 6a 6b 6c 6d

7a 7b 7c

8a 8b 8c 8d

Mitigation Banking County Funding Source Concessionaire Funding Grant Funding Source Funding Source 1 2 Source 3 4 $7,998,762 $485,726 $12,515,759 $9,597,154

Existing Acres 124.36 13.76 55.61 72.43 140.47 406.62

Active Sports / Soccer Tournament Center Active Sports / Multi-use Fields Active Sports / Frisbee Golf & Bridge

3a 3b

Element Description Panhandle Conservation I Triangular Conservation I Chino Creek Corridor Conservation Area II Conservation I / Golf Course Conversion Existing Conservation Area

Element Description Active Recreation- Northwest Pond Active Recreation- Northeast Pond Active Recreation- East Pond Active Sports / Sport Fields & Courts

Single-User Lease- Equest. Stable Area Single-User Lease- Equest. Performance Area Single-User Lease- Equestrian Paddocks

Existing Natural Area- Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) (31.21 acres) Open Pond- Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) (59.70 acres) Open Pond- Hiking Trails (6' Decomposed Granite) (59.70 acres) Improved Docking and Pier Facilities (1.81 acres) Totals 118.18 TOTAL FOR THE NORTH CENTRAL STUDY AREA 244.17 Length in Feet Multi-use paths (pedestrian, scooters, ebikes and bikes) 6,951 Soft Surface Trails (hikers, runners, mountain bikes and equestrian uses) 29,635 New Roadways 0

355 477 Length in Miles 1.32 5.61 0.00

Table 8-8: Summary of West and North Central Study Areas

118.18 244.17

2 2

$377,986 $377,986 $7,334,540

$30,597,401

$417,339 $417,339 $30,597,401 $0 $140,703,348 Mass Cut for On-site Fill (in CY): Exported cut that is assumed to have 10% poor fill (in CY): Mass Fill from on-site cuts (in CY): Need to import for compaction (in CY): Needed to import for poor fill material (in CY): Total Need for Imported Material (in CY):

218,753 21,875 179,179 21,875 21,875 43,751

Mitigation Banking County Funding Source Concessionaire Funding Grant Funding Source Funding Source 1 2 Source 3 4 $1,178,087 $1,128,422 $1,130,151 $236,029 $3,672,690 $0 $2,907,226 $376,639 $3,283,864

$377,986 $377,986 $3,672,690 $3,661,850 Mass Cut for On-site Fill (in CY): Exported cut that is assumed to have 10% poor fill (in CY): Mass Fill from on-site cuts (in CY): Need to import for compaction (in CY): Needed to import for poor fill material (in CY): Total Need for Imported Material (in CY):

0 0 3,565 0 0 0

Chapter 8: Implementation | 209

SOUTH CENTRAL STUDY AREA Element ID # 9a 9b 9c 9d 9e 9f

10a

11a 11b 11c 11d

12a 12b 12c 12d 12e 12f 12g 12h 12i

13a 13b 13c 14a

Element Description Low Impact Open Space - RV Camping (275 camp spots) Low Impact OS- Primitive Tent Rentals (27 camp spots) Low Impact OS- Luxury Tent / Cabin Rentals (10 camp spots) Low Impact OS- Tent / Cabin Rentals (15 camp spots) Low Impact OS-Existing Campgrounds (75 camp spots) Low Impact OS- Camp Support & Gathering (15 camp spots) Totals

Existing Acres 34.58 14.13 15.88 5.96 34.05 4.87 109.46

Existing Trips 0 0 0 0 409 0 409

Future Acres 34.58 14.13 15.88 5.96 34.05 4.87 109.46

Future Trips 415 170 191 72 409 97 1,352

Sub-total Cost $15,453,191 $1,822,870 $3,094,293 $2,136,008 $254,405 $2,562,356 $25,323,122

With Soft Costs $18,543,829 $2,187,444 $3,713,151 $2,563,209 $305,286 $3,074,828 $30,387,746

With Contingency $22,252,595 $2,624,933 $4,455,781 $3,075,851 $366,343 $3,689,793 $32,775,502

Projected Year 7 3 4 4 4 5

With Escalation $27,367,884 $2,868,335 $5,015,021 $3,461,897 $412,322 $4,277,482 $43,402,941

0 0

53.36 53.36

534 534

$21,592,471 $21,592,471

$25,910,965 $25,910,965

$31,093,158 $31,093,158

Totals

53.36 53.36

$36,045,492 $36,045,492

Totals

2.51 65.54 52.05 19.43 139.54

0 0 0 97 97

2.51 65.54 52.05 19.43 139.54

38 2,228 26 117 2,409

$709,904 $25,019,420 $183,775 $269,600 $26,182,699

$851,885 $30,023,304 $220,530 $323,520 $31,419,239

$1,022,261 $36,027,965 $264,636 $388,224 $37,703,086

4 10 7 4 0

$1,150,564 $48,418,572 $325,469 $0 $49,894,605

Totals

2.36 74.67 7.17 25.44 7.65 250.64 55.65 29.98 22.33 475.89

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2.36 74.67 7.17 25.44 7.65 250.64 55.65 29.98 22.33 475.89

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

$76,978 $0 $0 $5,602,984 $0 $0 $8,200,542 $65,298 $0 $13,945,802

Totals

50.50 21.44 243.32 97.06 412.32

0 0 0 194 0

50.50 21.44 243.32 97.06 412.32

0 0 0 194 0

506 Length in Miles 2.80 9.38 4.68

1190.57

4295

Low Impact OS- Nature Center & Garden (150 Parking)

Special Event- Obstacle Course Special Event- Amphitheater (1,500 Parking) Special Event- Fields for Sporting Events Single Lease- Model Airplane Runway

Conservation 1 Conversion of Open Space Conservation 1 - Existing Conservation 1 Existing -Nature Center Area Conservation 1 Enhanced Creek Corridor Conservation 1- Existing Wetlands Conservation 1- Existing Main Riparian Areas Converted Open Space to Conservation Enhanced Conservation 1/Invasive Removals Mill Creek Existing Conservation Area

Agricultural Leases Agricultural Leases Agricultural Leases Single Lease- Hunting Dog Training Area TOTAL FOR THE SOUTH CENTRAL STUDY AREA

1190.57 Length in Feet Multi-use paths (pedestrian, scooters, ebikes and bikes) 14,773 Soft Surface Trails (hikers, runners, mountain bikes and equestrian uses) 49,532 New Roadways 24,688

Table 8-9: Summary of South Central Study Area

$87,044,094

$16,951,478

$20,341,774

$24,410,129

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$104,669,429

$121,913,521

$153,753,168

Mitigation Banking County Funding Source Concessionaire Funding Grant Funding Source Funding Source 1 2 Source 3 4 $27,367,884 $2,868,335 $5,015,021 $3,461,897 $412,322 $4,277,482 $39,125,460 $36,045,492 $36,045,492 $1,150,564 $48,418,572 $325,469 $0 $49,894,605 $76,978 $0 $0 $5,602,984 $0 $0 $8,200,542 $65,298 $0 $13,945,802 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,945,802

$39,125,460 $49,894,605 Mass Cut for On-site Fill (in CY): Exported cut that is assumed to have 10% poor fill (in CY): Mass Fill from on-site cuts (in CY): Need to import for compaction (in CY): Needed to import for poor fill material (in CY): Total Need for Imported Material (in CY):

$36,045,492 268,120 26,812 516,891 26,812 26,812 53,624

210 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

EAST SIDE STUDY AREA Element ID # 15a 15b 16a 17a 18a

19a

20a

21a 21b 21c 21d

22a 22b

Element Description Active Recreation: Existing Paintball Park Active Recreation- New Paint Ball Park Active Recreation- Extreme Adventure Zone Active Recreation- Blue Zone Swimming Facility Active Recreation- Down on the Farm Totals

Existing Acres 26.22 15.79 41.78 28.27 17.89 144.48

Existing Trips 79 0 0 0 0 79

Future Acres 26.22 15.79 41.78 28.27 17.89 144.48

Future Trips 79 474 836 2,262 245 3,895

Sub-total Cost $20,955 $3,148,131 $8,592,929 $15,967,022 $8,315,069 $36,044,106

With Soft Costs $25,146 $3,777,757 $10,311,515 $19,160,427 $9,978,083 $43,252,927

With Contingency $30,175 $4,533,308 $12,373,818 $22,992,512 $11,973,699 $51,903,513

Totals

10.64 10.64

0 0

10.64 10.64

0 0

$0 $0

Totals

14.53 14.53

0 0

14.53 14.53

11 11

$260,387 $260,387

$312,464 $312,464

$374,957 $374,957

Totals

87.57 4.87 37.69 25.53 130.12

0 0 0 0 0

87.57 4.87 37.69 25.53 130.12

0 0 29 20 29

$772,674 $8,259,812 $34,965 $9,032,486

$927,209 $9,911,774 $41,958 $10,838,983

Circulation- McCarty Rd. Expansion & Bridge Circulation- Hellman Road Expansion TOTAL FOR THE EASTERN STUDY AREA

0.00 0.00 299.77

0 0 79

0.00 0.00 299.77

0 0 3936

$8,404,500 $1,206,900 $53,741,478

$10,085,400 $1,448,280 $64,489,774

Low Impact Open Space- Agriculture

Low Impact Open Space

Conservation 1 Conservation 1: Restoration from Paintball Area Conservation 1: Conversion for Pond Area Conservation 1: Southeast Side

Multi-use paths (pedestrian, scooters, ebikes and bikes) Soft Surface Trails (hikers, runners, mountain bikes and equestrian uses)

Length in Feet 19,104 10,607

Projected Year 2 2 4 5 3 16

Mitigation Banking County Funding Source Concessionaire Funding Grant Funding Source Funding Source 1 2 Source 3 4 $32,013 $4,809,387 $13,926,841 $26,654,623 $13,083,985 $0 $0 $58,506,848

$0 $0

$409,725 $409,725

$1,112,651 $11,894,129 $50,350 $13,006,779

2 3 3 5

$1,180,411 $12,997,035 $55,018 $14,177,447

$12,102,480 $1,737,936 $77,387,729

2 2

$12,839,521 $1,843,776 $85,933,541

Length in Miles 3.62 2.01

Sub-total Cost

Table 8-10: Summary of East Side Study Area

With Escalation $32,013 $4,809,387 $13,926,841 $26,654,623 $13,083,985 $58,506,848

GRAND TOTAL

$245,545,092

$1,180,411 $12,997,035 $14,177,447

$12,839,521 $1,843,776 $14,177,447 $13,249,246 $58,506,848 Mass Cut for On-site Fill (in CY): Exported cut that is assumed to have 10% poor fill (in CY): Mass Fill from on-site cuts (in CY): Need to import for compaction (in CY): Needed to import for poor fill material (in CY): Total Need for Imported Material (in CY): Actual Listed on Costs for Importing (in CY):

With Soft Costs, Mitigation Cont. & Escalation Banking Source 1 $424,041,493

$70,528,946

323,658 32,366 222,035 32,366 32,366 64,732 69,531

County Funding Source 2

Concessionaire Funding Source 3

Grant Funding Source 4

$63,929,583

$253,203,602

$36,379,374

Bike, Pedestrian, Hiking and Equestrian Trail Summary Multi-use paths (pedestrian, scooters, ebikes and bikes) Soft Surface Trails (hikers, runners, mountain bikes and equestrian uses) New Roadways Should be Counted as Expansions Should be Counted as Park Roads

Length in Feet 62,682 111,775 76,805 14,154 62,651

Length in Miles 11.87 21.17 14.55 2.68 11.87

Table 8-11: Bike, Pedestrian, Hiking and Equestrian Trail Summary

Chapter 8: Implementation | 211

8.5 Recommended Phasing and Public Priorities There are many ways to organize a phasing plan. A sequential geographic area by area could be implemented. Infrastructure could be constructed first, with functions and amenities added later. A priority could be set based on available funding sources. Or, the priorities could be set by the pubic input process. The following tables have been arranged to set the phasing based on spreading out the improvements on the existing Prado Regional Park developed portions to span a 10-year capital improvement program. Since the Proposition 70 lands have less restrictions and additional funding sources, it is wise to accelerate priority projects in this corner of the park. The Proposition 70 lands should be developed in a five-year capital improvement program.

8.6 Likely Funding Sources The tables on the following pages identify a range of potential funding opportunities for design, implementation, and maintenance for parks, open space, and transportation-related projects. The information is arranged into federal, state, local, and private categories. The right side of the table lists both typical and atypical approaches to address each funding source. Many funding sources can be accessed through atypical project approaches by combining several categories or elements of a project into one application. The tables makes it clear that there are many potential funding opportunities available to agencies. The County of San Bernardino is encouraged to partner with other groups to develop comprehensive and competitive applications to increase their chances of receiving funding. The County should also be aware that whenever federal funds are used for park, bicycle, and pedestrian projects, a certain level of state and/or local matching funding is generally required. State funds are often available to local governments on similar terms. Almost every implemented project or program in the United States has had more than one funding source and it often takes a large level of effort and coordination to compile the various sources together. The information provided in this chapter is relevant as of the completion of this plan. It should be noted that current funding sources may be depleted, or that new sources may become available. The County should coordinate and encourage staff to periodically review these funding sources and verify their viability.

8.7 Wide Range of Funding Sources The following tables identifies a wide range of funding opportunities for design, implementation, and maintenance for parks, open space, and environmental projects, as well as healthy communities and active transportation.

Prado Regional Park Master Plan: PROJECT PHASING Sorted by The Top Weighted Scores from Public Surveys Program E lem ent

Potential Year Schedu led

Project General Nam e

Linear recreation such as walking paths, bike paths, or hiking trails

GENERAL TRAILS AND PATHS

IN PARK ROADWAYS & TRAILS

YEARS 3-5

Nature exploration such as bird watching, nature walks, or lookouts

"BLUE AND GREEN" NATURE CENTER

GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS

YEARS 4-5

Aquatic adventure such as kayaking, paddle boats, or fishing

"PRADO LAKE BOATWORKS"

Social venues such as picnic areas or shaded gathering spaces

NORTH CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS

Nature programs for K-12, college students, or environmental groups

"BLUE AND GREEN" NATURE CENTER

6 Camping such as RV, tent, yurt, cabin, or group campgrounds

YEAR 2 GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS

YEAR 2-5 YEARS 4-5

"CAMP PRADO"

YEARS 2-7 YEARS 4-5

State-of-the-Art Nature Center

"BLUE AND GREEN" NATURE CENTER

Demonstration gardens such as native plant gardens or water-wise gardens

"BLUE AND GREEN" NATURE CENTER

9 Innovative play areas such as adventure playgrounds or themed playgrounds

"FITNESS CAMP"

YEARS 4-5

"DOWN AT THE FARM"

Aquatic play such as water slides, wave pool, lazy river, or spray grounds

"BLUE ZONE"

Skills courses such as ropes course, climbing wall, or zip Line

"EXTREME ZONE"

Community events such as local concerts, car shows, or movie nights

"THE GROVE"

"EXTREME ZONE"

YEARS 3-5 YEAR 5

"CHALLENGE PARK"

"FITNESS CAMP"

YEAR 4

"CAMP PRADO"

YEAR 10

Pool activities such as lap swim, water aerobics, or swim lessons

"BLUE ZONE"

Outdoor exercise equipment

NORTH CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS

Olympic venues such as archery and shooting ranges

ARCHERY / GUN RANGES

NO PROJECT

HUNTING DOG TRAINING PARK

NO PROJECT

16 Canine activities such as dog training facility or dog park 17

Agricultural activities such as corn mazes, community gardens, or farmersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; market "DOWN AT THE FARM"

Retail spaces such as general store, bait shop, camp store, or food trucks

19 Equestrian activities such as horseback riding, event training, or dressage

YEAR 5 "FITNESS CAMP"

"DOWN AT THE FARM"

YEARS 3-5

"DOWN AT THE FARM"

Multi-purpose event space such as banquet halls or restaurants

"THE GROVE"

"PRADO LAKE BOATWORKS"

"DOWN AT THE FARM"

"BLUE AND GREEN" NATURE CENTER YEARS 3-10

YEAR 9

Court sports such as tennis, pickleball, basketball, tennis, or sand volleyball

"CAMP PRADO"

Field sports such as soccer, baseball, softball, or frisbee golf

"WEST SIDE PARKS"

Court tournaments such as sand volleyball, tennis, pickleball, or basketball

"CAMP PRADO"

Rolling adventure such as skate parks or bike skills park

"PAINTBALL WORLD PARK"

"CHALLENGE PARK"

"EXTREME ZONE"

Regional events such as major concerts, Battle of the Ring, or equestrian shows

"CHALLENGE PARK"

26 Field tournaments such as soccer or baseball 27

Sporting events such as Spartan Races or Cycle Cross Not on the survey

YEAR 3-5

"CAMP PRADO"

"PRADO EQUESTRIAN CENTER"

YEARS 2-3 & 8

YEARS 2-7 YEARS 2-3

"FIELDS OF GREEN"

YEAR 5 YEARS 3-5 YEAR 7 YEAR 6 / YEAR 8

"FIELDS OF GREEN" "CHALLENGE PARK"

"FITNESS CAMP"

EXPANDED ROADWAYS OFF-PARK

GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS IN PARK ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS YEARS 2-10

Various Environmental Projects & Cut / Fill Operations

Table 8-12: Comparison of Public Priorities and Project Phasing

PHASING FUNDING PER YEAR Sub-total Cost 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029

YEAR 7

With Soft Costs, Cont. & Escalation

$15,990,107 $24,472,745 $21,327,451 $33,559,317 $32,581,418 $54,321,052 $41,879,957 $69,848,898 $45,523,034 $78,273,913 $21,055,969 $37,290,507 $29,574,897 $53,949,016 $8,208,634 $15,422,985 $29,403,626 $56,903,060 $245,545,092 $424,041,493

Table 8-13: Phasing Funding per Year

212 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

WEST STUDY AREA Area ID # 1e 2c 3a 4a 5a-b 3b 2a 1d 2b 1c 1b 1a

Major Project Associated With GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS (Grading to Lower, Invasive Removals & Restoration

CREEK GRADING OF GOLF COURSE

"WEST SIDE PARKS" (Golf Course Conversion, Foot Golf, Trails, and Euclid Bridge) GOLF COURSE CONVERSION TO FRISBEE GOLF & EUCLID BRIDGE GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS (Grading to Lower, Invasive Removals & Restoration "WEST SIDE PARKS" (Golf Course Conversion, Foot Golf, Trails, and Euclid Bridge)

CREEK GRADING OF GOLF COURSE TO NATURALIZE SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS- SIGNALS AT EUCLID / POMONA

"WEST SIDE PARKS" (Golf Course Conversion, Foot Golf, Trails, and Euclid Bridge)

LEASE EXPANSION FOR ARCHERY RANGE

GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS (Grading to Lower, Invasive Removals & Restoration "FIELDS OF GREEN"( Soccer Arena, Fields & Champion Park)

CREEK GRADING OF GOLF COURSE / CREEK RESTORATION SOCCER TOURNAMENT ARENA AND CENTER

"WEST SIDE PARKS" (Golf Course Conversion, Foot Golf, Trails, and Euclid Bridge)

GOLF COURSE CONVERSION INTO NATURAL AREA

"FIELDS OF GREEN" (Multi-use Turf Fields)

GOLF COURSE CONVERTED TO MULTI-USE FIELDS FUTURE MITIGATION-CHINO CREEK CORRIDOR

GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS (Grading to Lower, Invasive Removals & Restoration GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS (Grading to Lower, Invasive Removals & Restoration GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS (Grading to Lower, Invasive Removals & Restoration

FUTURE MITIGATION- TRIANGULAR AREA FUTURE MITIGATION- PANHANDLE AREA

Dependent Actions

Projected Year Need Excavation for Tournament Center 2 Close Golf Course 3 Need Excavation for Tournament Center 4 Depends on Safety Funding 5 Depends on Concessionaire Funding 5 Need to Restore after Excavation 5 Depends on Concessionaire Funding 6 Need Excavation for Multi-use Fields 7 Must follow 1d Excavation 8 Driven by Other Agency Mitigation 9 Driven by Other Agency Mitigation 10 Driven by Other Agency Mitigation 10 TOTAL FOR THE WEST STUDY AREA

Sub-total Cost $819,589 $2,460,919 $3,398,048 $200,000 $250,000 $1,308,107 $45,523,034 $5,419,003 $27,690,917 $6,661,310 $250,990 $4,133,216 $98,115,133

With Soft Costs, Mitigation Cont. & Escalation Banking Source 1 $1,252,083 $1,252,083 $3,872,322 $5,507,327 $333,871 $417,339 $2,120,092 $78,273,913 $9,597,154 $9,597,154 $50,512,356 $12,515,759 $12,515,759 $485,726 $485,726 $7,998,762 $7,998,762 $172,886,703 $31,849,484

County Funding Source 2 $0

Sub-total Cost $246,540 $247,422 $150,000 $618,602 $619,550 $645,829 $1,547,324 $4,075,267

Concessionaire Funding Source 3 $0 $3,872,322 $5,507,327

Grant Funding Source 4 $0

$333,871 $417,339 $2,120,092 $78,273,913 $50,512,356 $0

$11

$140,703,349

$333,882

With Soft Costs, Mitigation Cont. & Escalation Banking Source 1 $376,639 $377,986 $236,029 $1,128,422 $1,130,151 $1,178,087 $2,907,226 $7,334,540 $0

County Funding Source 2

Concessionaire Funding Source 3 $376,639 $377,986

Grant Funding Source 4

Sub-total Cost $223,275 $1,822,870 $3,094,293 $269,600 $14,126,232 $2,136,008 $254,405 $709,904 $2,562,356 $21,592,471 $15,453,191 $183,775 $25,019,420 $87,447,799

With Soft Costs, Mitigation Cont. & Escalation Banking Source 1 $385,819 $2,868,335 $5,015,021 $436,950 $24,410,129 $24,410,129 $3,461,897 $412,322 $1,150,564 $4,277,482 $36,045,492 $27,367,884 $325,469 $48,418,572 $154,575,937 $24,410,129

County Funding Source 2 $385,819 $2,868,335 $5,015,021

Sub-total Cost $20,955 $3,148,131 $772,674 $8,404,500 $1,206,900 $900,120 $8,315,069 $260,387 $8,259,812 $23,430 $34,965 $8,592,929 $15,967,022 $55,906,893

With Soft Costs, Mitigation Cont. & Escalation Banking Source 1 $32,013 $4,809,387 $1,180,411 $1,180,411 $12,839,521 $1,843,776 $1,375,110 $13,083,985 $409,725 $12,997,035 $12,997,035 $36,868 $36,868 $55,018 $55,018 $13,926,841 $26,654,623 $89,244,314 $14,269,333

County Funding Source 2

NORTH CENTRAL STUDY AREA Element ID # 7c 8d 6d 6b 6c 6a 7b

Major Project Associated With "PRADO EQUESTRIAN CENTER" (New Stables , Riding & Performance Arena)

EQUESTRIAN CONCESSIONAIRE EXPANSION

PRADO LAKE CONCESSION (Paddle craft, Boat Rentals & Upgraded Building) AQUATICS EXPANSION ON THE POND WITH ADJACENT TRAILS NORTH CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS (Expanded picnic, shelters, playgrounds & trails)

UPGRADED PORTION OF EX. FIELDS /RESTROOMS / PICNIC UPGRADED RESTROOMS /PLAYGROUNDS/TRAILS NE POND NORTH CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS (Expanded picnic, shelters, playgrounds & trails) UPGRADED RESTROOMS / PICNIC / TRAILS EAST POND NORTH CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS (Expanded picnic, shelters, playgrounds & trails) UPGRADED FIELDS /RESTROOMS / PICNIC / TRAILS NW POND "PRADO EQUESTRIAN CENTER" (New Stables , Riding & Performance Arena) EQUESTRIAN RIDING AND PERFORMANCE CENTER NORTH CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS (Expanded picnic, shelters, playgrounds & trails)

SOUTH CENTRAL STUDY AREA Element ID # 13a-c 9b 9c 11d 12a-i 9d 9e 11a 9f 10a 9a 11c 11b

Major Project Associated With

GENERAL TRAILS AND PATHS (Multi-use paved paths, hiking & equestrian trails ) "CAMP PRADO" (Camping, Camp Center, Multi-use Bldg., Game Center & Camp Fire "CAMP PRADO" (Camping, Camp Center, Multi-use Bldg., Game Center & Camp Fire GENERAL TRAILS AND PATHS (Multi-use paved paths, hiking & equestrian trails ) GENERAL TRAILS AND PATHS (Multi-use paved paths, hiking & equestrian trails ) "CAMP PRADO" (Camping, Camp Center, Multi-use Bldg., Game Center & Camp Fire "CAMP PRADO" (Camping, Camp Center, Multi-use Bldg., Game Center & Camp Fire "FITNESS CAMP" (Obstacle Course, Ropes Course) "CAMP PRADO" (Camping, Camp Center, Multi-use Bldg., Game Center & Camp Fire "BLUE AND GREEN" NATURE CENTER (Building, Native Gardens, Trails & Parking "CAMP PRADO" (Camping, Camp Center, Multi-use Bldg., Game Center & Camp Fire "CHALLENGE PARK" (Open Special Use Fields and Trails) "THE GROVE" ( Performing Arts Amphitheater, Support Buildings, Restrooms & Parking)

EAST SIDE STUDY AREA Element ID # 15a 15b 21b 22a 22b 22c 18a 20a 21c 21a 21d 16a 17a

Dependent Actions

Projected Year Depends on Concessionaire Funding 2 Depends on Concessionaire Funding 2 After Equestrian Expansion Occurs 3 When Funding Becomes Available 8 When Funding Becomes Available 8 When Funding Becomes Available 8 Depends on Concessionaire Funding 9 TOTAL FOR THE NORTH CENTRAL STUDY AREA

Projected Year EXTENDED TRAILS THRU AGRICULTURAL AREAS No Dependent Actions 2 27 PRIMITIVE CAMPING ADDITION AND AMENITIES Nearby Excavation / Restoration will be needed First 3 10 LUXURY CAMPING ADDITION AND AMENITIES Nearby Excavation / Restoration will be needed First 4 EXTENDED TRAILS NEAR MODEL AIRFIELD McCarty Road Extension 4 ENVIRONMENTAL EXPANSIONS / MITIGATIONS Available Funding and Roadway Construction 4 15 TENT / CABIN CAMPING ADDITIONS AND AMENITIES Nearby Excavation / Restoration will be needed First 4 UPGRADE 75 CAMPING EXPANSIONS AND AMENITIES Nearby Excavation / Restoration will be needed First 4 SPECIAL EVENT OBSTACLE COURSE Available Funding and Roadway Construction 4 15 ECOTENTS CAMPING ADDITION / CAMP CENTER AMENITIES Nearby Excavation / Restoration will be needed First 5 BLUE AND GREEN NATURE CENTER / GARDENS / PARKING Available Funding and Roadway Construction 5 250 RV / 25 TRAILER CAMPING ADDITIONS AND AMENITIES Nearby Excavation / Restoration will be needed First 7 SPECIAL EVENT AREA WITH AMENITIES Available Funding and Roadway Construction 7 THE GROVE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER WITH 1,5000 PARKING Available Funding and Roadway Expansions 10 TOTAL FOR THE SOUTH CENTRAL STUDY AREA

Projected Year PAINTBALL PARK ( Restoration, Gates, Screening, Parking Areas & New Paintball Areas) RIVER AREA CLEAN UP / LEASE SWAP AT EXISTING PAINTBALL Lease Negotiations and Lease Swap / Mitigation 2 PAINTBALL PARK ( Restoration, Gates, Screening, Parking Areas & New Paintball Areas) PAINT BALL CONCESSIONAIRE EXPANSION Lease Negotiations and Lease Swap / Mitigation 2 PAINTBALL PARK ( Restoration, Gates, Screening, Parking Areas & New Paintball Areas) POND CLEAN-UP / STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS Needs to Precede other Prop. 70 Projects 2 OFF PARK ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS(Hellman, Cucamonga, McCarty, River Rd.) MCCARTY ROAD AND BRIDGE Needs to Precede other Prop. 70 Projects 2 OFF PARK ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS(Hellman, Cucamonga, McCarty, River Rd.) HELLMAN ROAD EXPANSION Needs to Precede other Prop. 70 Projects 2 OFF PARK ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS(Hellman, Cucamonga, McCarty, River Rd.) CUCAMONGA ROAD EXPANSION Needs to Precede other Prop. 70 Projects 2 "DOWN AT THE FARM" ( Playgrounds, Adventure Areas, Rental Facilities, & Food Areas) DOWN AT THE FARM /AGRICULTURAL DESTINATION Prop. 70 Funding 3 GENERAL TRAILS AND PATHS (Multi-use paved paths, hiking & equestrian trails ) TRAILS AND RESTORATION AREAS Needed for Internal Circulation / Park Once then Walk 3 GENERAL TRAILS AND PATHS (Multi-use paved paths, hiking & equestrian trails ) EXTENDED TRAILS THROUGH NATURAL AREAS Needed for Internal Circulation / Mitigation Sites 3 GENERAL TRAILS AND PATHS (Multi-use paved paths, hiking & equestrian trails ) EXTENDED TRAILS THROUGH NATURAL AREAS Needed for Internal Circulation / Mitigation Sites 3 GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS (Grading to Lower, Invasive Removals & Restoration TRAILS AND RESTORATION AREAS Needed for Internal Circulation / Mitigation Sites 3 "EXTREME ZONE" (Bike Skills Park, Skate Park, Rope Courses, Zip Line, Bike Pump Track.) EXTREME ADVENTURE ZONE Concessionaire Interest & Funding 4 "BLUE ZONE" (Competition Pools, Recreation Pools, Lazy River, Slides & Splash Pads) BLUE ZONE SWIM PARK Concessionaire Interest & Funding 5 TOTAL FOR THE EASTERN STUDY AREA

Table 8-14: Phasing Priorities by Study Area

Major Project Associated With

Dependent Actions

$236,029 $1,128,422 $1,130,151 $1,178,087 $3,672,690

$2,907,226 $3,661,850

Concessionaire Funding Source 3

Grant Funding Source 4

$436,950 $3,461,897 $412,322 $1,150,564 $4,277,482 $36,045,492 $27,367,884

$43,788,761

$325,469 $48,418,572 $50,331,555 Concessionaire Funding Source 3 $32,013 $4,809,387

$36,045,492 Grant Funding Source 4

$12,839,521 $1,843,776 $1,375,110 $13,083,985 $409,725

$16,468,132

$13,926,841 $26,654,623 $58,506,848

Land and Water Conservation Fund (LCWF) Urban Community Forestry Program Recreational Trails Program Urban and Community Forest Program Community Forest and Open Space Conservation

U.S. National Park Service/California Department of Parks and Recreation U.S. National Park Service Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/Regional agency may contribute Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Land and Water Conservation Fund (LCWF) Statewide Park Program Prop 84 Round 2 Recreational Trails Program Proposition 117 - Habitat Conservation Nature Education Facilities Watershed Program Parks and Water Bond Act of 2018 - Prop 68 Stormwater Flood Management Prop. 1E Roberti-Z’Berg-Harris (RZH) Grant Program - Prop 40 Aquatic Center Grants Active Transportation Planning Grants (ATP) Traffic Safety Grants Local Partnership Program - Competitive and Formulaic Non-point Source Pollution, Watershed Plans (Props 13, 40, 50 & 84) Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation (EEMP) California River Parkways and Urban Streams Restoration Grant Strategic Growth Council Urban Greening Program California Cap and Trade Program Urban Forestry Program (Leafing Out, Leading Edge and Green Trees Grants)

California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Department of Boating and Waterways California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) California Office of Traffic Safety California Transportation Commission (SB 1 funds) State Water Resources Control Board California Natural Resources Agency and Caltrans California Natural Resources Agency/Department of Water Resources California Natural Resources Agency Cal EPA, Air Resources Board California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)

Special Habitat Conservation Programs Special Parks and Recreation Bond Revenues Special Transportation Bonds and Sales Tax Initiatives Equipment Rental Fees Facility Use Permits Fees Fees and Charges/Recreation Service Fees General Fund General Obligation Bonds Intergovernmental Agreements Lease Revenues Revenue Bond Revenues Sales Tax Revenues Transient Occupancy Tax Revenues Various Sports Field Grants Community Health Initiatives America’s Historical Planning Grants Corporate Sponsorships Private Sector Partnerships Active Living By Design Cultivating Healthy Communities Grant Program Obesity Prevention Regional Grant Program Grant for Making a Healthier California People for Bikes Community Grant Program

Regional MPOs/Local Cities Regional MPOs/Local Cities Regional MPOs/Local Cities Local Jurisdictions Local Jurisdictions Local Jurisdictions Local Jurisdictions Local Jurisdictions Local Jurisdictions Local Jurisdictions Local Jurisdictions Local Jurisdictions Local Jurisdictions Various Agencies, Foundations and Corporations Kaiser Permanente National Endowment for the Humanities Private Corporations Private Corporations Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Aetna Foundation Aetna Foundation California Wellness Foundation PeopleForBikes/Partners

State Funding Sources

Local Funding Sources

Table 8-15: Likely Funding Sources for Prado

• • • • • • • • •

• • • •

•

• •

•

• •

• • • •

• •

•

• • •

• • • •

• • •

• • • •

• • •

•

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • •

• • • • • • •

•

• • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

•

• •

•

• • •

• • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • •

•

• • •

•

• •

• • • •

• • •

(Paddle craft, Boat Rentals & Upgraded Building)

"PRADO LAKE BOATWORKS"

(Restoration, Gates, Screening, Parking & New Paintball Areas)

(Expanded Picnic, Shelters, Playgrounds & Trails)

"PAINTBALL WORLD PARK"

• • •

• • • • •

•

• • • •

•

• • • • • • • •

•

• • • •

NORTH CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS

(Paved and Unpaved)

IN PARK ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS

(Multi-use Paved Paths, Hiking & Equestrian Trails )

GENERAL TRAILS AND PATHS

(Grading to Lower, Invasive Removals & Restoration)

•

• • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

GENERAL ECOSYSTEMS ADDITIONS

(Golf Course Conversion, Foot Golf, Trails, and

• • • • •

• •

Euclid Bridge)

• • •

• • • • •

• • •

• •

"WEST SIDE PARKS"

( Performing Amphitheater, Support Bldgs. , Restrooms & Parking)

"THE GROVE"

(New Stables , Riding & Performance Arena)

"PRADO EQUESTRIAN CENTER"

(Obstacle Course, & Ropes Course)

"FITNESS CAMP"

(Soccer Arena, Fields & Champion Park)

"FIELDS OF GREEN"

(Multi-use Turf Fields)

"FIELDS OF GREEN"

(Bike Skills, Skate Park, Rope Courses, Zip Line & Pump Track)

"EXTREME ZONE"

EXPANDED ROADWAYS OFF-PARK

• • •

•

(Hellman, Cucamonga, McCarty Road & Bridge)

(Playgrounds, Adventure Areas, Rental Facilities, & Food Areas)

"DOWN AT THE FARM"

(Open Special Use Fields and Trails)

"CHALLENGE PARK"

(Camping, Camp Center, General Store, Game Bldg. & Camp Fire)

"CAMP PRADO"

(Competition & Rec. Pools, Lazy River, & Slides)

"BLUE ZONE"

FUNDING ORIGIN

(Building, Native Gardens, Trails & Parking)

FUNDING SOURCE Federal Funding Sources

"BLUE AND GREEN" NATURE CENTER

Chapter 8: Implementation | 213

• •

• • • • •

• •

• • •

•

• •

•

• • • • •

• • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • •

214 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

FINDING, FRAMING, AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Federal Funding Sources Land and Water Conservation Fund (LCWF)

U.S. National Park Service/California Department of Parks and Recreation

Urban Community Forestry Program

U.S. National Park Service

Surface Transportation Program (STP) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/Caltrans Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Transportation Alternative Program (TAP)

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

Recreational Trails Program

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/Regional agency may also contribute

EPA Brownfields Clean Up and Assessments

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

• • • • • • •

Atypical Approaches

Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • • • •

Sustainable Communities Planning Grant and Incentive Program Urban Revitalization and Liveable Communities Act

U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

•

Community Development Block Grants ACHIEVE

Center for Disease Control and Prevention

Urban and Community Forest Program Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Community Forest and Open Space Conservation

Table 8-16: Federal Funding Sources

•

• •

First and Last Mile

• • • • • • • • •

Urban Forestry

•

Back to Nature

•

• •

• • • •

Low Impact Development

Culture and History

• • • • • • • • •

Chapter 8: Implementation | 215

FINDING, FRAMING, AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Choice Neighborhoods Implementation Grants Safe Routes to School, Mini-grants

Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Public and Indian Housing National Center for Safe Routes to School and Caltrans

Metropolitan and Statewide and Non-metropolitan Transportation Planning Urbanized Area Formula Grants Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Grants Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Formula Grants for Rural Areas TOD Planning Pilot Grants

• • • • • • • •

• • • •

Atypical Approaches

Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • •

First and Last Mile

• • • • • • • •

Urban Forestry

Back to Nature

•

Low Impact Development

• • •

•

Culture and History

216 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

FINDING, FRAMING, AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

State Funding Sources Land and Water Conservation Fund (LCWF) Statewide Park Program Prop 84 Round 2 Recreational Trails Program Proposition 117 - Habitat Conservation Nature Education Facilities

California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR)

Watershed Program Parks and Water Bond Act of 2018 - Prop 68 Stormwater Flood Management Prop. 1E Roberti-Z’Berg-Harris (RZH) Grant Program - Prop 40 Aquatic Center Grants

Table 8-17: State Funding Sources

Department of Boating and Waterways

• • • • • • • • • •

Atypical Approaches

Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • • • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

• • •

• •

Urban Forestry

• • • •

Back to Nature

Low Impact Development

•

• • • • • • •

• • • • • •

Culture and History

•

Chapter 8: Implementation | 217

FINDING, FRAMING, AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Community Based Transportation Planning, Environmental Justice and Transit Planning Active Transportation Planning Grants (ATP) Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 (SB 821) California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Sustainable Transportation Planning Grants Regional Improvement Program Safe Routes to School Programs(SR2S) Traffic Safety Grants

California Office of Traffic Safety

Local Partnership Program - Competitive and Formulaic

California Transportation Commission (SB 1 funds)

Coastal Conservancy Grants

California Coastal Conservancy

Non-point Source Pollution, Watershed Plans, Water Conservation (Props 13, 40, 50 and 84) Sustainable Communities Planning, Regional SB 375

State Water Resources Control Board Strategic Growth Council/Dept of Conservation

Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation (EEMP)

California Natural Resources Agency and Caltrans

California River Parkways and Urban Streams Restoration Grant

California Natural Resources Agency/Department of Water Resources

Strategic Growth Council Urban Greening Program

California Natural Resources Agency

California Cap and Trade Program

Cal EPA, Air Resources Board

Urban Forestry Program (Leafing Out, Leading Edge and Green Trees Grants)

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)

• • • • • • •

Atypical Approaches

Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • •

•

• •

• • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

• • •

Back to Nature

• • • • • • • •

•

• •

Low Impact Development

Culture and History

• • • • • •

• •

•

Urban Forestry

• • •

• • • • • •

• • • • • • •

• •

218 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

FINDING, FRAMING, AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Local Funding Sources Special Habitat Conservation Programs Special Parks and Recreation Bond Revenues

Regional MPOs/Local Cities

Special Transportation Bonds and Sales Tax Initiatives Advertising Sales/Naming Rights Community Facilities District (CFD) Infrastructure Financing District (IFD) Facilities Benefit Assessment District (BFA) Easement Agreements/Revenues Equipment Rental Fees Facility Use Permits Fees Fees and Charges/Recreation Service Fees Food and Beverage Tax

Table 8-18: Local Funding Sources

Local Jurisdictions

Atypical Approaches

Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

Urban Forestry

Back to Nature

Low Impact Development

• • •

• • • •

• • •

•

• • • •

•

• • • •

Culture and History

• • • • • • • •

Chapter 8: Implementation | 219

FINDING, FRAMING, AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

General Fund General Obligation Bonds Intergovernmental Agreements Lease Revenues Measure U Mello Roos Districts Residential Park Improvement Fees Park Impact Fees Traffic Impact Fees In-Lieu Fees Pouring Rights Agreements Private Development Agreements Surplus Real Estate Sale Revenues

Local Jurisdictions

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • •

Atypical Approaches

Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • •

• • • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Urban Forestry

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

Back to Nature

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Low Impact Development

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

Culture and History

• • • • • • • • • • • •

220 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

FINDING, FRAMING, AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Revenue Bond Revenues Sales Tax Revenues Transient Occupancy Tax Revenues

Local Jurisdictions

Wastewater Fund Reserves Utility Taxes Business Improvement Districts (BID) Maintenance Assessment Districts (MAD)

Non-profits, Business Organizations or City

Property Based Improvement Districts (PBID) Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) Various Sports Field Grants

Various Agencies, Foundations and Corporations

Community Health Initiatives

Kaiser Permanente

America’s Historical Planning Grants

National Endowment for the Humanities

Corporate Sponsorships Private Corporations Private Sector Partnerships

Atypical Approaches

Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

• • • • • •

Urban Forestry

• • • • •

Back to Nature

• • • •

•

• • • • • •

• • • •

Low Impact Development

• • •

• •

Culture and History

• • • •

•

• • •

Chapter 8: Implementation | 221

FINDING, FRAMING, AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Non-Profit Partnerships

Non-Profit Corporations

Foundation Grants

Private Foundations

Private Donations Private Individuals Irrevocable Remainder Trusts Targeted Fund-raising Activities

Local Jurisdictions

Active Living By Design

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

Cultivating Healthy Communities Grant Program Aetna Foundation Obesity Prevention Regional Grant Program Grant for Making a Healthier California

California Wellness Foundation

People for Bikes Community Grant Program

PeopleForBikes/Partners

• • • • •

Atypical Approaches

Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

• • • •

•

Urban Forestry

• • • •

Back to Nature

• • • •

•

Low Impact Development

• • • • •

Culture and History

• • • • • • • • •

222 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

8.8 Parking and Traffic Impact Strategies

Transportation management strategies include the following:

Prado Regional Park currently hosts large events and has the potential to accommodate more in the future with the implementation of the master plan. Examples of events include concerts and performances at the community performing arts center, soccer tournaments, Olympic use of the shooting range, or athletic or themed events in the park’s open space areas. Transportation management strategies can decrease the traffic impact of such events. When developing transportation management strategies for events, the following elements should be considered: Traffic flow routes Traffic control Site access and parking Travel demand management and transit service Accommodation of bicyclists, pedestrians, and shuttles Incident management and traveler information planning

Table 8-19: Transportation Management Strategies Cost Summary and Schedule TYPE

TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT STRATEGY POTENTIAL LOCATIONS

Traffic flow routes established based upon

Euclid Avenue; Pine Avenue; Johnson

location of event and access point location.

Avenue, Chino Corona Road; Cucamonga

Multiple routes/access points may be

Avenue; Hellman Avenue; El Prado Road

considered for very large events. Traffic Flow Routes Identification of emergency vehicle access routes and emergency evacuation

The parking and traffic management plan may vary based on the size and type of event. The event characteristics will dictate the parking and traffic flow challenges and, in turn, the approach to minimize traffic impacts. For example, a large event with a specific start time which operates for a few hours will have concentrated traffic flows near the beginning and end of the event. In contrast, festival type events that last multiple days will result in a wider dispersion of traffic over time. While smaller events may not require a specific set of strategies, they may still require signage within the park and supplemental traffic control at the park access points, depending on the type of event. Large events will likely require a combination of strategies. A parking and traffic management plan should be developed and implemented under any of the following conditions: 1. A large event is anticipated to impact the peak commuter flow times (AM peak hour and/or PM peak hour). 2. An event has a set arrival time in which a large influx of participants is anticipated, thus potentially impacting the surrounding roadway network and/or the access points. 3. Overflow parking will be required to accommodate users. 4. Parking off-site will be required. 5. An event may generate a large amount of bicycle or pedestrian traffic flow to/from the park and the surrounding neighborhoods. 6. Any other large event in which the City of Chino or Caltrans require a parking and traffic management plan given traffic flow concerns.

routes.

Pine Avenue; Johnson Avenue, Chino Corona Road; Cucamonga Avenue; Hellman Avenue; El Prado Road

Police-assisted traffic control at stop-controlled

Euclid Avenue @ Pomona-Rincon Road;

intersections via manual direction of traffic

Chino-Corona Road @ Hellman Avenue;

during peak inbound and outbound traffic

Chino-Corona Road @ Cucamonga Avenue

times.

Euclid Avenue/Butterfield Ranch Road @ SR-71 Traffic Control

Manually override traffic signal cabinet signal

Ramps; Euclid Avenue @ Pine Avenue; Pine

timing during peak inbound and outbound

Avenue @ Chino Corona Road; Pine Avenue/

traffic times.

Schleisman Road @ Hellman Avenue

Establish turn restrictions if necessary to funnel traffic to key routes.

Varies

Chapter 8: Implementation | 223

Shuttle parking between other open areas within the park suitable for parking to/from the

Varies based upon event location and size

event area.

Temporary “No Event Parking” signs located on area streets to facilitate traffic flow.

Temporary “No Event Parking” signs located Site Access and Parking

within local neighborhoods.

Accommodation of Bicyclists, Pedestrians, and

Chino-Corona Road; Cucamonga Avenue;

direction of traffic during peak inbound and

@ Johnson Avenue

using temporary delineators and appropriate

shuttle drop-off and pickup locations

lighting for nighttime events. Bicycle and pedestrian crossings.

Variable message sign placement to notify

roadways, dependent upon the type and

drivers of conditions.

location of event

outbound traffic times. Designated disabled parking.

Located in proximity to event area

Incident Management/ Traveler Information

Multiple channelized lanes with pay stations to

Event access point

Pine Avenue; Chino-Corona Road

Key locations within Park and on area

Developments located south of Pine Avenue

Euclid Avenue @ MCombs Way; Pine Avenue

Within park between event and parking areas/

Shuttles

Hellman Avenue

Police-assisted traffic control via manual

Established bicycle and pedestrian pathways

Planning

Base app to include entire park and local Use of a phone app to provide parking and

area; specific information provided for

travel information to event attendees and park

locations throughout as prescribed by the

users.

event needs

expedite entry into event. Dedicated bicycle parking.

Located in proximity to event area

General plan for areas in park where large Develop emergency evacuation plan.

Shuttle service or use of autonomous transportation system within park to provide

events will be held; Event-specific plan for each event

Within park boundaries

access between events and other uses. Use of a phone app to connect park users to Travel Demand Management and

other transportation area resources such as SigAlert.

Transit Service Dedicated parking and shuttle service for event employees.

Encourage carpooling through the marketing of the event.

Regional transportation system outside of park boundaries Within park boundaries; specific location dependent upon event location

For very large events or those with high peak turnover and/or limited parking areas

Strategies should accommodate emergency vehicle access and should also be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Additionally, planning for special events will also likely require coordination with the City of Chino and Caltrans.

224 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

8.9 Environmental Review Framework The Prado Regional Park Master Plan establishes concepts to enhance the park by redeveloping some of the existing facilities, restoring or creating new habitat, and developing new areas. The master plan will require California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental compliance documentation. In addition, the master plan will require environmental compliance under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because the regional park lands are leased from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). The following CEQA and NEPA strategy is intended to guide the County of San Bernardino through the appropriate level of environmental documentation during initial and later phases of implementation.

8.9.1 California Environmental Quality Act Environmental Compliance Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Under CEQA, the appropriate level of environmental documentation is a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR). By providing the necessary policy and regulatory guidance, the Program EIR will ensure that future redevelopment of parcels in Prado Regional Park implements the goals and policies of the master plan. A Program EIR is prepared for one large project, the master plan, which will be implemented over time as a group of small projects constructed in phases. The use of a Program EIR affords the following advantages. The Program EIR can: Allow for a more exhaustive consideration of effects and alternatives than would be practical in an EIR on an individual action; Ensure consideration of cumulative impacts that might be slighted in a case-by-case analysis; Avoid duplicative reconsideration of basic policy considerations; Allow the lead agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program-wide mitigation measures early when the agency has greater flexibility to deal with basic problems or cumulative impacts; and Allow reduction in paperwork.

A Program EIR will be most helpful with subsequent activities if it deals with the effects of the program as specifically and comprehensively as possible. With a strong and detailed analysis of the program, many subsequent activities could be found to be within the scope of the project described in the Program EIR, and no further environmental documents would be required.

A Program EIR can be used to simplify the task of preparing environmental documents on later parts of the program. The Program EIR can: Provide the basis in an Initial Study for determining whether the later activity may have any significant effects; Be incorporated by reference to deal with regional influences, secondary effects, cumulative impacts, broad alternatives, and other factors that apply to the program as a whole; and Focus an EIR on a subsequent project to permit discussion solely of new effects which had not been considered before.

National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Compliance Any project that has a federal nexus, such as a project that receives federal funding, a federal permit, or other federal authorization, requires the federal agency to ensure that it considers the potential environmental impacts of their proposed actions and any reasonable alternatives before undertaking a major federal action, as defined by 40 Code of Federal Regulations Section 1508.18. As the federal agency land owner of Prado Regional Park, the Corps is responsible for determining the need for a separate environmental clearance under NEPA. The Corps also has discretion to determine the appropriate level of NEPA documentation and which technical studies will be required. In addition, to streamline the environmental process, a lead agency under CEQA may work with a federal agency to prepare a joint document that will meet the requirements of both CEQA and NEPA. Types of NEPA Documents The Corps is likely to require an Environmental Assessment or a Categorical Exclusion. Each are described below. Environmental Assessment (EA): This document is prepared for federal actions when the significance of environmental impact is not clear. If, after preparing an EA, it is determined that the impact is significant, an EIS is prepared. If not, a Finding of No Significant Impact is documented. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): This document is prepared for federal actions that may have a significant effect on the human environment. The EIS process involves several steps defined by regulation that an agency must follow.

Like most federal agencies, the Corps has enacted its own, agency-specific NEPA implementing regulations. The Corps’ guidance document is “Procedures for Implementing NEPA” (Regulation No. 200-2-2). In consultation with the Corps, the County should consider a joint CEQA/NEPA document.

Chapter 8: Implementation | 225

Initial determination check list for potential impacts For projects like the Prado Regional Park Master Plan, an Initial Study is used to define the scope of the EIR. An initial review of the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist has been conducted relative to existing conditions and is included as Attachment X. This initial review document will aid the County in establishing the relevant baseline of the study area for the Program EIR. Initial environmental scoping summary As part of the CEQA process, the lead agency hosts a scoping meeting. The scoping meeting is an opportunity for agencies and members of the public to learn about Prado Regional Park Master Plan, identify potential environmental impacts, review alternatives, and suggest actions early in the development process. This master plan process included a series of public outreach and advisory committee meetings described previously. During these meetings, stakeholders identified three key areas of potential impact: Traffic: Vehicle travel to, from, and within the park is of concern, especially in terms of special events. Parking for special events, primary routes of travel, possible road closures, and alternative means of transport are among the subjects to be addressed in the scoping meeting. Noise: Stakeholders are also concerned about noise, particularly noise generated by special events. The scoping meeting facilitators should discuss locations for special events, frequency, hours of operation, and the distance to sensitive receptors. Biological Resources: Under the proposed master plan, areas that contain biological resources may be identified for alternative uses which has sparked concern and interest from stakeholders.

Follow on technical studies needed In accordance with the CEQA compliance process, supporting technical studies will be required for the project. The studies anticipated to be necessary to support preparation of the environmental document are described below. Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Emissions An air quality assessment is prepared to quantify potential construction-related and operational impacts that could contribute to ozone and particulate matter emissions. Common and/or anticipated sources of air quality pollution in and around Prado Regional Park generally occur as a result of maintenance vehicles, passerby traffic on Euclid Avenue, and point sources such as parking lots and barbecue grills. Prado Regional Park lies within the San Bernardino County portion of the South Coast Air Basin. The South Coast Air Quality Management District is the agency responsible for ensuring that state and federal clean air standards are attained and maintained in the basin.

A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory is prepared to quantify GHGs (i.e., nitrous oxide, methane, and carbon dioxide) from both direct sources (i.e., area and mobile) and indirect sources (i.e., energy/ water consumption and wastewater/solid waste generation). Recent local fires have exacerbated GHG emission levels in the Prado Regional Park area; however, other local factors continue to add to this problem. Fertilizer is identified as one of the common GHG emissions contributors and it is likely that fertilizer is used in Prado Regional Park for maintenance purposes. Maintenance vehicles, lawnmowers, and park visitor traffic also generate GHG emissions. Other sources of emissions not directly associated with the park include vehicular traffic traveling on adjacent roadways, including Euclid Avenue, Pine Avenue, and SR-71. Biological Resources A biological resource assessment is conducted to determine the presence of biological resources including riparian areas (the interface between land and a river or stream), wetlands, lakes, and other streams that could qualify as jurisdictional waters and Waters of the U.S., and special-status species in Prado Regional Park, as well as potential impacts to such resources. A database search of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s California Natural Diversity Database, the California Native Plant Society’s Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Information for Planning and Consultation on-line system and Critical Habitat mapper is conducted to preliminarily identify any special-status biological resources known to occur in the region. A review of on-site and adjoining soils is conducted using the U.S. Department of Agriculture/Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey, as well as historical/current aerial photographs and topographic maps, to further assess the ecological changes that the project site has undergone. Following the literature review, staff biologists systematically survey the project site to document baseline biological conditions and verify the site’s ability to support any special-status plant and wildlife species, including any special-status vegetation communities. During the field survey, a detailed assessment of the site’s potential to provide suitable habitat for any of the special-status plant and wildlife species identified during the literature review is conducted. Notes are taken on all plant and wildlife species observed on-site during the field survey, as well as mapping of the location of any special-status plant, wildlife, and vegetation communities, if present on-site.

226 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Cultural and Paleontological Resources

Hazardous Waste/Materials

A cultural resource assessment is conducted to identify historical, archaeological, and paleontological resources within Prado Regional Park and determine the potential for impacts to such resources. The Prado Basin area in which Prado Regional Park is located has been extensively studied over the past few decades. Many of the previous studies were conducted in association with flood-control projects initiated by the Corps and are referenced in the draft Prado Basin Master Plan (2005). These studies identify features and provide recommendations for further study and evaluation. Due to changes and alterations in the land since that time, a site-specific Phase I cultural resource study should be conducted for the project. Depending on the results of the Phase I study, a Phase II subsurface study may follow.

A Phase I environmental site assessment (ESA) is conducted to determine the presence of hazardous materials within Prado Regional Park, using methods consistent with the ASTM International E 152713 Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments, which complies with 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 312 (the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule). A Phase I ESA consists of four components: records review; site reconnaissance; interviews; and report preparation.

A records search for cultural resources (archaeological and historical) is conducted through the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton, which characterizes the status and extent of previous cultural resource studies completed in the project area and helps predict the types of resources expected within the project site boundaries. This research acquires information adequate to develop a historic context and evaluate relevant parcels for California Register eligibility (CEQA significance). Repositories consulted include the City of Chino, the office of the San Bernardino County Assessor and Recorder, the San Bernardino County Historical Archives, records of the Bureau of Land Management and General Land Office, and various internet resources. A pedestrian cultural resources survey of the accessible portions of the project site is conducted under the supervision of a cultural resources professional that meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interiorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology and for Architectural History. The goal of this task is to identify any cultural resources within the project site boundaries (including prehistoric and historic archaeological and historic architectural resources), and to produce or update the necessary site records. The data gathered in the field is adequate to provide architectural descriptions for entry on the required California Department of Park and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms, and to assist in evaluating the parcels for California Register eligibility/CEQA significance. A cultural resources report is produced consistent with CEQA requirements, in a format acceptable to the County, which includes a project description, cultural setting, methods, results, and recommendations sections. Relevant maps and photographs are included and DPR 523 forms are attached to record any cultural resources identified. Mitigation recommendations are offered in the report to reduce potential project-related impacts to California Register eligible (CEQA significant) resources. The cultural resources report also includes an appended paleontological review.

The goal of a Phase I ESA is to evaluate site history, existing observable conditions, current site use, and current and former uses of surrounding properties to identify the potential presence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs) associated with the project site. RECs are defined in the ASTM E 1527-13 Standard as â&#x20AC;&#x153;the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.â&#x20AC;? Trivial or minor conditions are not RECs. A Phase I ESA is not intended to provide specific qualitative or quantitative information as to the actual presence of hazardous substances at the project site, but is to merely identify the potential presence based on available information. Light and Glare A light and glare analysis is conducted to examine the potential light and glare impacts anticipated to occur. This analysis is conducted pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. The light and glare evaluation includes a discussion of existing conditions and an analysis of potential impacts for each alternative. A complete photometric plan is needed to perform a light and glare analysis.

Chapter 8: Implementation | 227

Noise

Traffic/Transportation

A noise impact analysis is conducted to identify the locations of sensitive receptors within and adjacent to Prado Regional Park and quantify construction-related and operational noise levels and potential impacts anticipated to occur with implementation of the project. Common noise sources in the park include vehicle noise, visitors, amplified sound, and the shooting range. On-site temporary sensitive noise receptors vary throughout the different areas of the park. However, depending on the activities taking place, young children and the elderly would be the most sensitive to on-site noise sources. Animals are also considered sensitive receptors because they rely on meaningful sounds for communication, navigation, avoiding danger, and finding food. Behavioral and physiological responses of wildlife to noise have the potential to cause injury, energy loss, decreased food intake, habitat avoidance and abandonment, and reproductive losses. Off-site sensitive noise receptors include residential and school uses.

A traffic impact analysis is prepared to assess traffic conditions associated with project implementation. The traffic study analyzes forecast project trip generation, distribution, and assignment on the study area roadway/intersection circulation system (the study area would be identified based on discussion with agency staff). The analysis assesses the forecast traffic impacts of the project during typical weekday a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour conditions at the study intersections. Due to the unique nature of event traffic, the analysis should also assess the forecast traffic impacts during special events. The analysis documents the existing operation of the study intersections and determines near-term year operation of the study intersections both with and without the project to identify project-related traffic impacts using the Highway Capacity Manual analysis methodology. Where the analysis shows significant impact, mitigation measures are recommended in accordance with agency performance criteria. The analysis also documents forecast operating conditions after application of the recommended mitigation measures.

The applicable noise and land use compatibility criteria for Prado Regional Park are reviewed and noise standards regulating noise impacts are discussed for land uses on and adjacent to Prado Regional Park. A site visit is conducted and short-term noise level measurements are taken along the project area. Construction-related noise is also analyzed for this study. Noise impacts from construction sources are analyzed based on the anticipated equipment to be used, length of a specific construction task, equipment power type (gasoline or diesel engine), horsepower, load factor, and percentage of time in use. The construction noise impacts are evaluated in terms of maximum levels (Lmax) and hourly equivalent continuous noise levels (Leq) and the frequency of occurrence at adjacent sensitive locations. An analysis of vibration impacts is conducted based on the Federal Transit Administrationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s vibration analysis guidance. Analysis requirements are based on the sensitivity of the area, specific construction activities, and noise ordinance specifications. Off-site noise impacts from vehicular traffic are also assessed using the U.S. Federal Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108), which requires roadway segment average daily traffic volumes. On-site noise-generating activities will also be addressed and analyzed for potential impacts to the adjacent uses. They are also assessed against the Countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Municipal Code and General Plan Noise and Safety Element guidelines. Compliance with applicable noise standards is evaluated, with recommended mitigation measures included where appropriate.

228 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Project costs and schedule for preparing environmental review

The cost estimate and schedule are based on the following assumptions.

The total estimated cost and time frame for CEQA and NEPA are summarized as follows.

1. Technical studies include:

Cost Summary and Schedule COMPONENT

ESTIMATED COST

TIME FRAME

Program EIR

$260,000

9–18 months

Technical Studies

$50,000–$100,000

4–8 weeks

Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Study (jointly $50,000–$100,000 with Program EIR) Total

$360,000–$460,000

Air Quality Greenhouse Gas Biological Resources Cultural Resources Phase I ESA Light and Glare Noise Traffic Impact Assessment

Table 8-20: Environmental Review Costs

9–18 months, concurrent with Program EIR

2. The estimates herein are based on available information regarding the project description, the area of study, and possible alternatives. The costs of the EIR, EA/EIS, and technical studies will be refined once the County of San Bernardino, as the lead agency under CEQA, and the Corps, as the lead agency under NEPA, agree on a project description, the defined area of study, and alternatives. 3. Costs do not include state and federal permitting fees or mitigation costs. Initial CEQA Review An initial review of the project under the CEQA Checklist can be found in the appendix of the report.

APPENDICES

A-2 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Appendix A: Existing Traffic Conditions

1.0

Park Access

Vehicular access to Prado Regional Park is provided by a network of regional and local roadways. Park access driveways are provided along SR-83 (Euclid Avenue), Pine Avenue, and Pomona Rincon Road. SR-71, which has a partial cloverleaf interchange with Euclid Avenue, provides regional access to the area. Exhibit 1 shows the points of access and the roadway network that provides direct access to the areas of the park that currently generate traffic. Exhibit 1: Park Activity Areas and Access Points

A gate and pay station is located approximately 500 feet from the Euclid Avenue intersection. Vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians travel through the gate. Within the main park area, internal vehicular park circulation is provided via one main collector roadway that connects to the various parking areas. This internal circulation roadway begins at the main access gate near Euclid Avenue, extends north of the lake, and connects to the RV parking and tent camping areas located east of the lake. Usage of the existing main park area was evaluated through an examination of the gate information. The number of vehicles entering the main park area varies by month and is impacted by weather and events held at the park. Exhibit 2 shows the distribution of vehicle trips from July 2016 through June 2018. During that time, the number of vehicles entering the park by month varied from the peak volume of 5,804 cars in August 2016 and the lowest volume of 770 cars in February 2017. Both trendlines indicate that traffic volumes in the park area are higher in the warmer months and are lower in the cooler months. Substantial differences were noted between the two years as Year 2016 – 2017 had a total of 33,292 vehicles while Year 2017 – 2019 had a total of 26,443. Exhibit 2: Monthly Vehicle Activity at Main Gate

Prado Regional Park Monthly Vehicular Activity (Entering Main Gate)

# of Vehicles (Monthly)

6,000 5,025

4,871

4,000

3,000

4,428

3,117

2,973

2,842

2,724

3,041

2,938

2,829

2,000

The main park access is provided along Euclid Avenue. The golf course is accessible from Pine Avenue, west of Euclid Avenue. The equestrian center is accessible from Johnson Avenue which intersects with Pine Avenue east of Euclid Avenue. The Olympic shooting park, the archery range, and the dog park are accessible from Pomona Rincon Road, which connects to Euclid Avenue south of the main entrance. The intersection at the main point of ingress and egress is currently stop-controlled on the cross streets but not on Euclid. Exiting vehicles are controlled by a stop sign before turning onto Euclid Avenue. The roadway exiting the park accommodates a left turn lane and right turn lane for exiting vehicle storage. The right turn lane is provided for those planning to travel in the northbound direction of Euclid Avenue and a left turn lane is provided for those planning to travel in the southbound direction of Euclid Avenue. Traffic turning right is provided with an acceleration lane.

5,000

5,804

1,954

2,093

2,323 1,627 1,309

1,000

1,421

1,192 975

1,610

1,469

1,263

1,137 770

0 2016-2017 2017-2018

2.0

Month

Observations of Conditions

A field view focusing on the traffic conditions near the Park was conducted in November 2018. Below is a summary of the key observations noted during the field view:

Appendices | A-3

Exhibit 3: Average Daily Traffic Volumes 



 3.0

Euclid Avenue and Main Park Entrance Intersection – Turning in and out of the park can be difficult for the driver due to inconsistent speeds along Euclid Avenue, a lack of platoons (that results in breaks in traffic) in the northbound traffic, the curvature of the roadway, the roadway grade, the amount of signage in the median, and the lack of signalization and street lighting. Euclid Avenue – Operating speeds along Euclid Avenue vary. At times, heavy vehicles and higher volumes cause traffic to slow below the posted speed limit along the single lane sections. Euclid Avenue – “Road Closed” gates have been constructed along Euclid Avenue due to the potential for flooding in the area. Vehicular access to the park is prohibited when Euclid Avenue is closed due to flooding. Euclid Avenue and Pomona Rincon Road Intersection – Sight distance to the south appears to be adequate, however sight distance to the north is somewhat limited due to the density of the trees in the northwest corner of the intersection. Heavy traffic in both directions cause delay for those planning a turn onto Euclid Avenue. Internal Park Circulation – Internal park roadways appear sufficient for current dayto-day activity levels. Traffic Counts

Existing traffic activity along the area transportation network was examined through a review of available data and an additional data collection program specific to this project. Existing average daily traffic volumes (ADTs) are shown in Exhibit 3. Exhibit 4 shows the Thursday PM Peak Hour traffic volumes while Exhibit 5 provides Saturday Peak Hour traffic data. While many events occur at the Park on weekends, the Saturday data shown in Exhibit 5 represents a nonevent weekend traffic count. Traffic counts during a high-level event were conducted in January 2019.

A-4 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Exhibit 4: Thursday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes

Exhibit 5: Saturday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes

Note: Event data shown in green text.

1,087

2 0 2

4 12 1

15 1,111

Saturday (Non‐Event and Event)

Planning level traffic operations analysis and traffic signal warrant analysis was conducted for the intersections of Euclid Avenue / Main Park Entrance and Euclid Avenue / Pomona Rincon Road. Traffic operations analysis was conducted based on methodologies contained in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th edition, published by the Transportation Research Board. The main criteria for the traffic evaluation was level of service (LOS), a qualitative measure describing traffic operational conditions. LOS is a standard index of the service provided by a transportation facility and can range from LOS A (free-flow conditions) through LOS F (severely congested or delayed conditions). The traffic signal warrant analysis was conducted using the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). The results of that analysis are summarized below and detailed in Table 1 and Table 2.

Operations Analysis Results 1) At both study intersections, the side streets currently operate at a poor level of service (LOS F) during the Thursday PM Peak Hour and the Saturday Peak Hour. 2) Despite poor LOS for the traffic exiting the Main Park Entrance and Pomona-Rincon Road, traffic signal warrants are not currently met at either intersection.

Appendices | A-5

Table 1: Traffic Operations – Intersection Level of Service Level of Service Thursday PM Peak Saturday Peak Hour Hour (Non-Event Saturday) (Typical Weekday)

Location SR-83 (Euclid Avenue) and Main Park Entrance

Left

Right

Southbound

Left

Northbound

Left

Left-Thru

Right

Left-Thru

Right

Left

Westbound

SR-83 (Euclid Avenue) and Pomona Rincon Road

Eastbound Westbound Southbound

SR-83 (Euclid Avenue) and Main Park Entrance SR-83 (Euclid Avenue) and Pomona Rincon Road Total

Internal Park Transportation Network

Is Planning Level Traffic Signal Warrant Met? No

Note: 70% volume thresholds utilized since posted speed along Euclid Avenue is greater than 40 mph. 4.0

Notes: PDO = Property Damage Only.

Table 2: Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Thursday PM Peak Saturday Peak Saturday EightHour (Typical Hour (Non-Event Hour (Non-Event Location Weekday) Saturday) Saturday) SR-83 (Euclid Avenue) and Main Park Entrance SR-83 (Euclid Avenue) and Pomona Rincon Road

Intersection

Table 3: Historic Crash Data Summary Number of Collisions by Number of Collisions by Violation Type Severity Impro Unsa Unsaf e per PD fe DU Oth Tot Injury Fatal Total Lane O Turnin Spee I er al Chan d g ge

Crash Data

Historic crash data along Euclid Avenue was examined for the three-year period from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2017. The results of that analysis are summarized below and shown in Table 3.

Crash Analysis Results 1) Five crashes occurred at or near the Euclid Avenue and Main Park Entrance intersection. Improper Turning or Unsafe Speed were the violation types for those collisions. 2) Twenty-six crashes occurred at or near the Euclid Avenue and Pomona Rincon Road intersection. This equates to an average of one crash every 40 days. 35% of those crashes involved Improper Turning and 38% involved either Unsafe Speed or Unsafe Lane Change. 3) One fatal crash was reported near the intersection of Euclid Avenue and Pomona Rincon Road.

The internal access roadway appears to be adequate given the existing usage levels. Exhibit 6 shows the existing network of circulation roadways and paved parking areas. Expansion of the park may require additional circulation roads and parking areas. Exhibit 6: Internal Circulation and Paved Parking Areas

A-6 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

5.0

Transportation Planning Opportunities

Potential transportation improvement opportunities along the surrounding roadway network have been documented through a review of transportation planning documents. 1) The Caltrans Transportation Concept Report for State Route 83 (September 2012) recommends that the Euclid Avenue be relinquished to the local jurisdictions in the future. 2) The Southern California Association of Government (SCAG) Draft 2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program Project Listing includes Project ID 200207 along Pine Avenue which is described as “New Roadway connection (0-4 lanes) from El Prado to SR 71 and widening Pine Avenue from 2 to 4 lanes from El Prado to Euclid Avenue.” The project is listed on the 100% Prior Years” list. While $25,000 in prior funding was noted for studies, future funding is not identified. 3) Area general plans have identified the following future roadway classifications: Roadway SR-83 (Euclid Avenue)

Pine Avenue west of SR-83 (Euclid Avenue) Pine Avenue east of SR-83 (Euclid Avenue) 1 2

Roadway Classification

Source

Expressway

City of Chino1

Major Divided Highway

San Bernardino County2

Truck Route

City of Chino1

Primary

City of Chino1

Secondary Highway

San Bernardino County2

Truck Route

City of Chino1

Major

City of Chino1

Secondary Highway

San Bernardino County2

Truck Route

City of Chino1

City of Chino General Plan 2025 (July 2010) San Bernardino County General Plan (Draft, August 21, 2018)

4) The Draft San Bernardino County General Plan has also identified the following potential projects along Euclid Avenue: bus rapid transit, Class II bicycle facility, and mobility focus area. Improved and/or additional access to the park uses can be considered as part of potential expansion of the park. While the main park entrance currently does not meet a traffic signal warrant for the existing non-event levels, expansion of the park uses may increase traffic and result in a need for improvements to that intersection. Other intersection improvements such as a roundabout or warning system through the use of signing and pavement markings could be considered, however they may not be consistent with other potential long-term improvements along the Euclid Avenue corridor which has been identified in the City of Chino General Plan as a divided, 6 to 8 lane expressway. Maintaining park access along Euclid Avenue is ideal given its position as a regional park and its connection to SR-71. Relocation of the main park entrance to Pine Avenue could be considered if

a SR-71/Pine Avenue Interchange extension to the east is considered a viable project in future. Also, depending on the future development of the park, relocating the main park entrance to the Pomona-Rincon Road intersection with Euclid Avenue could be considered. Other secondary access from Pine Avenue or Chino Corona Road could be considered based on the potential uses in the future.

Appendices | A-7

Appendix B: Initial Review CEQA Checklist Initial Review CEQA Checklist As part of the Prado Regional Park Master Plan process, existing conditions were documented and reviewed as they pertain to the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G checklist. The CEQA Checklist is provided for each category for context purposes only. In each section the checklist questions are accompanied by an assessment of existing conditions. The narrative is not intended to answer each question individually.

AESTHETIC RESOURCES This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to aesthetic resources. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only. a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

Prominent features located outside of, but visible from within the park, are Chino Hills to the west and Corona Hills to the south. Wider views of the Prado Basin are partially obscured by structures, trees, and some relief in topography. SR‐71, a portion of which traverses the park along its western boundary, is eligible for the State Scenic Highway System; however, it is not designated as a scenic highway by Caltrans. No other designated or eligible scenic highways exist within or adjacent to Prado Regional Park. Refer to Attachment A1 , On‐site Aesthetic Resources.

AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to agriculture and forestry. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only.

b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?

a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?

c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

b. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?

Aesthetic features occur in a diverse array of environments, ranging in character from urban centers to rural regions and wildlands. Adverse visual effects can include the loss of natural features or areas, the removal of urban features with aesthetic value, or the introduction of contrasting urban features into natural areas or urban settings.

c. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? d. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forestland (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?

Natural features may include but are not limited to open space, native or ornamental vegetation/landscaping, topographic or geologic features, and natural water sources. The loss of natural aesthetic features or the introduction of contrasting urban features may have a local impact or, if part of a larger landscape, may contribute to a cumulative decline in overall visual character. Sensitive viewsheds may be defined as those areas visible from densely populated areas with primarily residential use, and which have unrestricted views into the park. Primary factors influencing views into the basin are structures, trees, and topography. The most prominent aesthetic feature in the park is Prado Lake, a 60‐acre fishing lake located near the park’s northeastern boundary. Other features such as trees (willow, pepper, sycamore, mulberry, pine, oak, alder, ash, elm, and poplar) also comprise prominent aesthetic features. However, the park contains many other scenic features such as vast green open space, paved and unpaved walking trails, and wildlife. The park’s overall layout provides scenic views, as the open space is generally outlined by mature trees that act as a backdrop to views in most directions. Trees also provide privacy from adjacent communities and highways. Other features include facilities that typically exist within park environments such as parking lots, camping sites, soccer fields, shooting range, and an equestrian center. In addition, the abundant wildlife living in the park contributes to its aesthetic features; refer to the Biology section of this memo for a discussion of wildlife habitat.

e. Result in the loss of forestland or conversion of forestland to non‐forest use? f.

Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forestland to non‐ forest use?

The existing land uses within Prado Regional Park currently include Recreation / Open Space (R/OS) and Agriculture (AG). The park is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as mapped on the Important Farmland Finder maintained by the California Department of Conservation (DOC)1. According to the DOC farmland mapper, the park and surrounding areas are designated as Grazing Land; the existing vegetation on‐site is suited to the grazing of livestock. Other DOC land designations include Urban and Built‐up‐Land to the north, east, and west of the regional park. Designated Prime Farmlands are located to the north, south, and east of the regional park.2 Two surrounding parcels to the east and one to the

1Interactive California Important Farmland Finder https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/, accessed 2018. 2 California Department of Conservation. 2015. California Important Farmland: 1984-2016. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciftimeseries/. Accessed September 2018.

A-8 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Table 1: Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants

north are identified as active Williamson Act Contracts under the City’s Williamson Act Map. However, no conflict with the Williamson Act parcels is anticipated because these are located outside of the project area; refer to the Land Use section for existing land use and zoning designations.

Pollutant

The proposed Master Plan for the park will not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Williamson Act Contract land. Similarly, forestland or timberland would not be affected because no forestland nor timberland exist on‐site.

0.09 ppm

N/A

8 hours

0.07 ppm

0.075 ppm

1 hour

20 ppm

35 ppm

8 hours

9.0 ppm

9 ppm

Annual Average

0.03 ppm

0.053 ppm

1 hour

0.18 ppm

0.100 ppm

1 hour

0.25 ppm

0.075 ppm

24 hours

0.04 ppm

N/A

Annual Arithmetic Mean

20 µg/m3

N/A

24 hours

50 µg/m3

150 µg/m3

Annual Arithmetic Mean

12 µg/m3

24 hours

N/A

35 µg/m3

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)

a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10)

b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non‐attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?

Respirable Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

Air pollutants emitted into the ambient air by stationary and mobile sources are regulated by federal and state laws. These regulated air pollutants are known as “criteria air pollutants” and are categorized into primary and secondary pollutants. Primary air pollutants are those that are emitted directly from sources. Carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxide (NOX), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), lead, and fugitive dust are primary air pollutants. Of these, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 are criteria pollutants. ROG and NOX are criteria pollutant precursors and go on to form secondary criteria pollutants through chemical and photochemical reactions in the atmosphere (for example, ozone [O3] is formed by a chemical reaction between ROG and NOX in the presence of sunlight). O3 and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) are the principal secondary pollutants. Both state and federal ambient air quality standards for criteria pollutants are shown in Table 1.

1 hour

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to air quality. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) divides the state into 15 air basins that share similar meteorological and topological features. The South Coast Air Basin includes all of Orange County and the non‐desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. Prado Regional Park lies within the San Bernardino County portion of the basin. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the agency responsible for ensuring that state and federal clean air standards are attained and maintained in the basin.

Federal Primary Standard

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

AIR QUALITY

California Standard

Ozone (O3)

For a visual exhibit of lands under Williamson Act contract, refer to Attachment B1, Williamson Act

d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people?

Averaging Time

Major Pollutant Source Motor vehicles, paints, coatings, and solvents. Internal combustion engines, primarily gasoline‐powered motor vehicles. Motor vehicles, petroleum‐refining operations, industrial sources, aircraft, ships, and railroads. Fuel combustion, chemical plants, sulfur recovery plants, and metal processing. Dust and fume‐producing construction, industrial and agricultural operations, combustion, atmospheric photochemical reactions, and natural activities (e.g. wind raised dust and ocean sprays). Dust and fume‐producing construction, industrial and agricultural operations, combustion, atmospheric photochemical reactions, and natural activities (e.g. wind raised dust and ocean sprays).

Source: CARB, California Ambient Air Quality Standards, January 10, 2019. (https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/caaqs.htm).

Based on these air quality standards, CARB designates all areas within the state as either “attainment” (having air quality better than the California Ambient Air Quality Standards [CAAQS]) or “nonattainment” (having a pollution concentration that exceeds the CAAQS more than once in three years). Likewise, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency designates all areas of the U.S. as either being in attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) or nonattainment if pollution concentrations exceed the NAAQS. Because attainment/nonattainment is pollutant‐specific, an area may be classified as nonattainment for one pollutant and attainment for another. Some areas are unclassified, which means no monitoring data is available. Unclassified areas are considered to be in attainment. Attainment status for the San Bernardino County portion of the basin is shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Attainment Status for the San Bernardino County Portion of the South Coast Air Basin Pollutant

Federal

State

Nonattainment

Attainment

Nonattainment

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

Unclassified/Attainment

Attainment

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

Unclassified/Attainment

Attainment

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)

Unclassified/Attainment

Attainment

8-Hour Ozone (O3) Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10) Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

Appendices | A-9

Source: CARB, Area Designation Maps / State and National, January 10, 2019. (https://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm)

transported from upwind vehicular sources from air quality monitoring stations located in adjacent Los Angeles and Orange Counties3.

Based on attainment status, O3, PM10, and PM2.5 are the primary pollutants affecting the SCAQMD. CARB monitors ambient air quality at approximately 250 air monitoring stations across the state. The nearest air quality monitoring site to Prado Regional Park that monitors ambient concentrations of O3 and airborne particulates is the Fontana‐Arrow Highway Monitoring Station (14360 Arrow Highway, Fontana CA 92335), approximately 13 miles northwest of the park. Local air quality data from 2015 to 2017 is shown in Table 3. This table lists the monitored maximum concentrations and the number of days the air quality exceeded the state and federal air quality standards for each year.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Table 3: Summary of Local Air Quality Data Year

Maximum Concentration

Days State/Federal Standard Exceeded

N/A

2015 2016 2017

0.136 ppm 0.156 0.150

4/* 2/* 5/*

0.07 ppm

0.075 ppm

2015 2016 2017

0.106 ppm 0.116 0.128

10/10 8/8 13/13

9.0 ppm (1‐hour)

2015 2016 2017

2.78 ppm 1.65 1.62

0/0 0/0 0/0

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

0.18 ppm

0.100 ppm

2015 2016 2017

0.089 ppm 0.071 0.069

0/0 0/0 0/0

Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10)

50 µg/m3

150 µg/m3

2015 2016 2017

77.7 µg/m3 184.0 106.5

*/* */1 */0

Respirable Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

N/A

35 µg/m3

2015 2016 2017

73.4 µg/m3 44.9 53.2

*/* */* */*

Pollutant

California Standard

Federal Standard

Ozone (O3) (1‐hour)

0.09 ppm

Ozone (O3) (8‐hour) Carbon Monoxide (CO)

An air quality assessment would be conducted as part of the environmental analysis associated with the proposed Master Plan to quantify potential construction‐related and operational impacts that could contribute to O3, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions. Common and/or anticipated sources of air quality pollution in the park generally occur as a result of maintenance vehicles, passerby traffic on Euclid Avenue, and point sources such as parking lots and barbecue grills.

Source: CARB, ADAM Air Quality Data Statistics. (https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php).; and CARB, Quality Assurance Air Monitoring Site Information Search. (https://www.arb.ca.gov/qaweb/siteinfo.php). January 10, 2019 Notes: ppm = parts per million; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; * = insufficient data available to determine value N/A = Not Applicable. Standard has not been established for this pollutant/duration by this entity

As shown in Table 3, O3, PM10, and PM2.5 are the primary pollutants affecting the area surrounding the park. Air quality complaints in the SCAQMD have been recorded as being related to smoke, dust, odors, and smoking vehicles. Primary sources of pollutants in the basin are motor vehicles, whose emissions account for over 90 percent of the total CO. The primary source of automobile emissions/pollutants in the study area is from traffic on SR‐91, SR‐71, and SR‐83. A related problem concerns pollutants (particularly O3 and particulates) which are

This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to greenhouse gas emissions. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only. a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? GHGs are gases that trap heat in the atmosphere including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases. The effect of each gas on climate change depends on how much of the gas is in the atmosphere, how long the gas stays in the atmosphere, and how strongly the gas impacts global temperature.4 The major sources of GHG production are electricity consumption, coal, natural gas, oil, wood, transportation, fossil fuel industry, industrial processes, waste management (landfills and wastewater management), agriculture (manure management, agriculture burning, livestock, crops), and forestry (non‐farm fertilizer and forest fires). Recent local fires have exacerbated GHG emission levels in the park area. However, other local factors continue to add to this problem. Fertilizer is identified as one of the common GHG emission contributors and it is likely that fertilizer is used in the park for maintenance purposes. Additionally, maintenance vehicles, lawnmowers, and park visitor traffic also generate GHG emissions. Other sources of emissions not directly associated with the park is vehicular traffic traveling on adjacent roadways including Euclid Avenue, SR‐91, and SR‐71. For air quality and GHG visuals, refer to Attachment C1, SCAQMD Monitoring Facilities.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to biological resources. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only. a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special‐status species in local or regional plans,

3 US Army Corps of Engineers. 2013. Prado Dam and Bain – Groundwater Level Monitoring Wells. https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/portals/17/docs/publicnotices/prado_ieua_dea_groundwater_level_monitoring_wells_2013.pdf. Accessed September 2018. 4 SCAG. 2018. Greenhouse Gases. http://www.scag.ca.gov/programs/Pages/GreenhouseGases.aspx. Accessed September 10, 2018.

A-10 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service?

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?

b. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special‐status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service?

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?

c. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service? d. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? e. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? f.

Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

g. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? h. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? There is no existing City or County habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved habitat conservation plan for the park area. As such, the proposed Master Plan would not conflict with any such plans or policies. A biological resource assessment would be conducted as part of the environmental analysis associated with the proposed Master Plan to determine the presence of biological resources including riparian areas, wetlands, and special‐status species within the park, as well as potential impacts to such resources. Michael Baker International prepared a separate report, Prado Regional Park Existing Biological Resources, containing in‐depth existing conditions assessment for Prado Regional Park. This report is included as Attachment D.

CULTURAL RESOURCES This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to cultural resources from readily available sources, among others documented below. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only.

c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? The Prado Basin area in which Prado Regional Park is located has been extensively studied over the past few decades. Many of the previous studies were conducted in association with flood‐control projects initiated by the Corps and are referenced in the draft Prado Basin Master Plan (2005). Additionally, a Phase II archaeological study for Prado Basin and the Lower Santa Ana River was conducted for the general area, which included the Prado Basin, Santa Ana River channel extending from Prado Dam to the Pacific Ocean, the Oak Street Drain in Corona, and Santiago Creek below the Villa Park Dam. Although the Phase II study included areas outside of the park, the study revealed the existence of 23 pre‐historic sites and 149 historic sites. Among these, five are known or putative cemeteries.5 Of the 23 prehistoric sites, 7 appear to be eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. No evidence of cultural remains was found at these sites and the extent of the land alteration suggests that they are completely destroyed (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1985). The Phase II study recommends that an overall historical study of the Prado Basin should be conducted to document the nineteenth and twentieth century occupation of the area as a case history in regional development. Additionally, most of the historic and pre‐historic sites documented in the Phase II study have been altered to the extent that they are not considered to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register. Cultural resource studies would be conducted as part of the environmental analysis associated with the proposed Master Plan to identify historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources within the park and determine the potential for impacts to such resources. For cultural resources visuals, refer to Attachment E1 .

GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to geology and soils. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only. a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic‐related ground failure, including liquefaction?

5 US Army Corps of Engineers. 1985. Phase II Archaeological Studies Prado Basin and The Lower Santa Ana River.

Appendices | A-11

iv.

Landslides?

b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

site. Since these types of sand deposits tend to have a slight to moderate erosion hazard, it is not anticipated that implementation of the proposed Master Plan would result in substantial soil erosion.10

c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on‐ or off‐site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?

The regional park is located on the Chino Groundwater Basin. The groundwater basin consists of an alluvial valley that is relatively flat from east to west, sloping from north to south at a 1 to 2 percent grade. Ground surface elevation ranges from about 2,000 feet above mean sea level, adjacent to the San Gabriel Mountains, to about 500 feet above mean sea level near Prado Dam.

d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18‐1‐B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?

LIQUEFACTION AND LANDSLIDE ZONES

e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? f.

Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

FAULTS AND SEISMICITY The US Geological Survey defines an active fault as a fault that has had surface displacement within Holocene times (about the last 11,000 years), and therefore is considered more likely to generate a future earthquake. The 1994 Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act requires the California State Geologist to establish regulatory zones (known as earthquake fault zones) around the surface traces of active faults that pose a risk of surface ground rupture. The act also requires that the State Geologist issue appropriate maps in order to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy and to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults 6(CGS 2018). Prado Regional Park is not located within an Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.7 However, the Whittier‐ Elsinore Fault runs parallel to the park, just west of SR‐71, north of the park’s lake.8 The Whittier‐Elsinore Fault is identified as late Quaternary, which refers to faults that are active between 0.5‐1.0 million years ago. Faults that have slipped during this time are sometimes considered active. EROSION Prado Regional Park is situated within the valley region of San Bernardino County. Surficial geologic units on the general site consist mainly of Chino silt loam deposits, Chualar clay loam, and Hilmar loamy fine sand.9 Although other soil types have been identified on the site, the previously mentioned soil types make up the majority of the

Liquefaction zones are areas where historical occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacement. Landslide zones are areas where previous occurrence of landslide movement, or local topographic, geological, geotechnical and substance water conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacement. No areas within or adjacent to the regional park are identified as an area prone to liquefaction or landslides, and as such, it is not anticipated that implementation of the proposed Master Plan would result in impacts relative to liquefaction or landslides.11 For geology and soils visuals, refer to Attachment F1, Soils .

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to hazards and hazardous materials. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only. a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one‐quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?

6 United States Geological Survey. Accessed 2019. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/ 7 United States Geologic Survey. 2018. Alquist-Priolo Faults. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/topics/geologicmaps/apfaults.php. Accessed September 10, 2018. 8 United States Geologic Survey. 2018. U.S. Quaternary Faults and Folds Database. https://usgs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=db287853794f4555b8e93e42290e9716. Accessed September 10, 2018. 9 Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. Soil Map – San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California, and Western Riverside Area.

10 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2017. Chino Landscape Restoration Environmental Assessment - Draft Soil Resource Report. Available at https://www.fs.usda.gov/nfs/11558/www/nepa/100118_FSPLT3_4244086.pdf. 11 California Geological Survey. 2016. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, Prado Dam Quadrangle. http://gmw.conservation.ca.gov/shp/EZRIM/Maps/PRADO_DAM_EZRIM.pdf. Accessed September 10, 2018.

A-12 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Project Name

Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? Hazardous materials, as defined by the California Health and Safety Code Sections 25501(n) and 25501(o), are substances with certain physical properties that could pose a substantial present or future hazard to human health or the environment when improperly handled, disposed of, or otherwise managed. Hazardous materials are grouped into the following four categories, based on their properties: 1) toxic (causes human health effects); 2) ignitable (has the ability to burn); 3) corrosive (causes severe burns or damage to materials); or 4) reactive (causes explosions or generates toxic gases). The California Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (also known as the Cortese List) is a planning document used by state and local agencies and private developers to comply with CEQA requirements in providing information about the location of known hazardous materials sites. The EnviroStor database constitutes the Department of Toxic Substances Control component of Cortese List data by identifying state response sites, federal Superfund sites, school cleanup sites, and voluntary cleanup sites. The EnviroStor database identifies sites that have known contamination or sites for which further investigation is warranted. It also identifies facilities that are authorized to treat, store, dispose, or transfer hazardous waste.12 EXISTING HAZARDOUS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS CONDITIONS The regional park is not included in the state’s Cortese list. Similarly, no portion of the park is included in the EnviroStor Sites and Facilities list of hazardous cleanup sites. The closest cleanup sites to the regional park are identified in Table 4. It is not anticipated that implementation of the proposed Master Plan would result in hazardous materials impacts; however, a Phase I ESA would be conducted as part of the environmental analysis associated with the proposed Master Plan to determine the presence of hazardous materials within the park.

Table 4: EnviroStor Vicinity Sites and Facilities13 Project Name

Status

Project Type

City

Distance

Viega Dairy Farm

Not Stated

Evaluation

Chino

1.0 miles northwest

Kimball Avenue Crash Certified Site

School Cleanup

Chino

1.2 miles north

State of California Closed Department of Corrections

Non‐Operating

Chino

0.5 miles east

12 EnviroStor. 2018a. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese). Accessed September 2018. 13 EnviroStor. 2018a. Sites and Facilities. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=prado+regional+park. Accessed September 2018.

Status

Liston Aluminum Brick Certified Company

Project Type

City

Distance

Voluntary Cleanup

Corona

0.5 miles west

SCHOOLS The nearest schools within the vicinity of the park are:



Ronald Reagan Elementary School, 8300 Fieldmaster St, Eastvale, CA 92880, located approximately 3.0 miles east.



Chino Hills High School, 16150 Pomona Rincon Rd, Chino Hills, CA 91709, located approximately 2.5 miles northwest.

AIRPORTS AND AIRSTRIPS Chino Airport, a public‐use, general aviation airport managed by the County of San Bernardino, is located approximately 1.5 miles north of the Regional Park’s northern boundary. Corona Municipal Airport, a public‐use, general aviation airport managed by the City of Corona, is located approximately 2.5 miles south of the Regional Park’s southern boundary. Common to airport adjacent land uses, airplane noise hazards are present at the park due to the close proximity to these airports. The future environmental document will map airport overlay zones and analyze those zones against the proposed project alternatives. WILDLAND FIRES A wildfire or wildland fire is a fire in an area of combustible vegetation that generally occurs in the countryside or a rural area. Depending on the type of vegetation where it occurs, a wildfire can also be classified more specifically as a brush fire, bush fire, desert fire, forest fire, grass fire, hill fire, peat fire, or vegetation fire. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire), a Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) is a mapped area that designates zones (based on factors such as fuel, slope, and fire weather) with varying degrees of fire hazard (i.e., moderate, high, and very high). While the designation of an FHSZ does not predict when or where a wildfire will occur, FHSZs do identify areas where wildfire hazards could be more severe and therefore are of greater concern. FHSZ maps evaluate wildfire hazards, which are physical conditions that create a likelihood that an area will burn over a 30‐ to 50‐year period. The maps do not take into account modifications such as fuel reduction efforts. As shown on the Cal Fire (2008) map of FHSZ in the southwestern part of the county, the park is designated as a Local and State Non‐Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). The park and its surroundings are categorized as having a moderate to low potential for wildland fires.14 The nearest designated Local and State VHFHSZ is in Chino Hills approximately 9.0 miles west. Although the park is not considered a VHFHSZ, brush fires have been

14 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire). 2008. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. http://frap.fire.ca.gov/webdata/maps/san_bernardino_sw/fhszl_map.62.pdf. Accessed September 2018.

Appendices | A-13

recorded near the park. On December 2017, a brush fire burned near I‐15 and SR‐60 with no impact to the park.15 However, wildland vegetated areas with large stands of dry vegetation are susceptible to local uncontrolled wildfire events. Even moderate burns can quickly eradicate vegetation and ground cover, leaving the area susceptible to greater erosion by rain storms and wind. The regional park exhibits areas of dry vegetation that can be a potential hazard. Fire hazards mapping and analysis for the purposes of CEQA is an emerging discipline and the County may consider this analysis as an optional technical study to accompany the Program EIR. EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN The San Bernardino County Emergency Operations Plan provides a comprehensive, single source of guidance and procedures for the County to prepare for and respond to significant or catastrophic natural, environmental, or conflict‐related risks that produce situations requiring coordinated response. It further provides guidance regarding management concepts relating to response and abatement of various emergency situations, identifies organizational structures and relationships, and describes responsibilities and functions necessary to protect life and property. The Emergency Operations Plan outlines the Emergency Role for Regional Parks. In the event of an emergency, regional parks would do the following16:         

Serve as a shelter (human and animal) Serve as staging areas Fire camps Incident command posts Field treatment sites Temporary morgues Coordinate with solid waste management disposal of waste Account for cultural resources Support department operations center

For hazards and hazardous materials visuals, refer to attachment F.

HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to hydrology and water quality. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only. a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?

15 Daily Bulletin. 2017. Grass Fire near Prado Regional Park in Chino stopped at 1-acre. https://www.dailybulletin.com/2017/12/07/grass-fireleads-to-chino-road-closures/. Accessed September 2018. 16 County of San Bernardino. 2013. San Bernardino County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). http://cms.sbcounty.gov/portals/58/Documents/Emergency_Services/Emergency-Operations-Plan.pdf. Accessed September 2018.

c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on‐ or off‐site? ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on‐ or off‐site? iii. create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? iv. impede or redirect flood flows? d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?

SURFACE WATER17 Chino Basin is traversed by a series of ephemeral, intermittent and perennial streams that include Chino Creek, San Antonio Creek, Cucamonga Creek, Deer Creek, Day Creek, Etiwanda Creek and San Sevaine Creek. The principal drainage course through the Chino Basin is the Santa Ana River. It flows 69 miles across the Santa Ana Watershed from its origin in the San Bernardino Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. The Santa Ana River enters Chino Basin at the Riverside Narrows and flows along the southern boundary of the basin to the Prado Flood Control Reservoir, where it is eventually discharged through the outlet at Prado Dam and, from the dam, the river flows the remainder of its course to the Pacific Ocean. EXISTING ON‐SITE DRAINAGE Prado Regional Park is centrally located in the Santa Ana River Watershed. Two natural streams pass through the park before flowing into the Santa Ana River. San Antonio Channel enters the park area from the northwest and Cucamonga Channel enters the park from the northeast. Within the park, stormwater flows as surface water and generally drains to the southwest toward the Prado Reservoir and dam. This water flows over permeable surfaces such as open channels however, some flow conveyed through impermeable roadways and parking lots and into a limited number of culverts that direct water into Prado Lake. The lake receives runoff from three localized drainages originating in the Chino Preserve area and the City of Ontario. is used for retention and the spillway at the bottom is used to control the release of water. In addition to natural drainage, the park receives water from the City of Chino and the City of Eastvale. Coordination with these cities is necessary to explore regional approaches to stormwater management and to ensure future system capacity. FEMA FLOOD HAZARDS The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) oversees floodplains and administers the National Flood Insurance Program adopted under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. The program makes federally subsidized flood insurance available to property owners in communities that participate in the program. Areas of

17 US Army Corps of Engineers. 2013. Prado Dam and Bain – Groundwater Level Monitoring Wells. https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/portals/17/docs/publicnotices/prado_ieua_dea_groundwater_level_monitoring_wells_2013.pdf. Accessed September 2018.

A-14 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Table 5: Land Use and Zoning Designations

special flood hazard (those subject to inundation by a 100‐year flood) are identified by FEMA through regulatory flood maps called Flood Insurance Rate Maps.

Location

FEMA designates the majority of Prado Regional Park as Zone AE and other portions as Zone D. Zone AE is defined by FEMA as areas that have a 1 percent probability of flooding every year (also known as the 100‐year floodplain), and where predicted flood water elevations above mean sea level have been established. Zone D is defined as areas where there are possible but undetermined flood hazards, as no analysis of flood hazards has been conducted.18 For hydrology and water quality visuals, refer to Exhibit G1 FEMA Flood Hazards Map.

Open Space Natural (OS‐2) Open Space Water (OS‐W) Agricultural and Open Space Natural (AG/OS‐ N) Public Facility (PF)

North

General Commercial (C‐G) Public Utility Corridors (P‐UC) Public Facilities (P‐PF)

This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to land use. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only. South East

West

Since Prado Regional Park is an existing facility and implementation of the proposed Master Plan would not require any right‐of‐way acquisition for expansion, the proposed Master Plan would not physically divide an established community. As noted, the regional park is operated by the County; however, it is located within City of Chino boundaries. Park standards that are applicable to the park are given in the Open Space Element of the County of San Bernardino General Plan. Specifically, General Plan Policy OS 1.5 states, “Strive to achieve a standard of 14.5 acres of undeveloped lands and/or trails per 1,000 population and 2.5 acres of developed regional park land per 1,000 populations.” The applicable existing City‐designated land uses and zoning for the park and adjacent areas consist of Recreation/Open Space (R/OS), Agriculture (AG), and Public (P); refer to Table 5. Since the existing recreational land uses that would occur under the proposed Master Plan would not change and would conform to existing land use designations, the proposed Master Plan would not conflict with any applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations. As discussed in the Agriculture and Forestry Resources of this memo, there are adjacent surrounding sensitive land uses including two parcels, contiguous to the east and north of the park, which are identified as having active Williamson Act Contracts under the City’s Williamson Act Map. Please refer to the Land Use, Zoning, and Williamson Act Maps.

Estate Residential (ER) Regional Commercial (RC) General Industrial (GI) Agriculture (AG) High Density Residential (HDR) Medium Density Residential (MDR) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Riverside County / Prado Reservoir City of Chino Hills Land Use Designation:  Low Density Residential (R‐S)  Agriculture Rancho (R‐A)  Chino Hills State Park Riverside County City of Eastvale Land Use Designation:  Conservation  Open Space Recreation  Commercial Retail  Light Industrial  Agriculture

Riverside County / Prado Reservoir Same as Land Use

Riverside County City of Eastvale Zoning Designation:  Watercourse, Watershed, and Conservation Areas (W‐1)  Heavy Agriculture (A‐2)  Planned Residential Developments (PRD)  General Commercial (C‐1/C‐P)

Sources: City of Chino. 2017. City Maps. https://cityofchino.org/city_hall/departments/community_development/maps. Accessed September 2018. Riverside County. 2018. Map My County. https://gis.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/?viewer=MMC_Public. Accessed September 2018. City of Eastvale. 2015. City Maps. http://www.eastvaleca.gov/about‐eastvale/city‐maps. Accessed September 2018.

For land use visuals, refer to Attachment H1 and H2.

MINERAL RESOURCES This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to mineral resources. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only. a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated in a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?

18 FEMA. 2017. FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer. https://hazardsfema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd&extent=117.67264102661184,33.93728967191614,-117.6310989733881,33.955090149338446. Accessed September 2018.

Zoning

Prado Recreation / Open Space (R/OS) Regional Park Agriculture (AG) Public (P)

LAND USE

a. Physically divide an established community? b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?

Land Use

Appendices | A-15

The U.S. Geologic Survey maintains an inventory of mineral resources utilizing the Mineral Resources Data System (MRDS). MRDS is a collection of reports describing metallic and nonmetallic mineral resources throughout the world, which include the deposit name, location, commodity, description, geologic characteristics, production, reserves, resources, and references.

On‐site temporary sensitive noise receptors vary throughout the different areas of the park. However, depending on the activities taking place at the park, young children and the elderly would be the most sensitive to on‐site noise sources. Off‐site sensitive noise receptors are limited because the park is located in a geographical area that is surrounded by uses not typically affected by noise; for example, Prado Dam is to the south, open space and agricultural lands are to the east, and the Chino Municipal Airport and industrial uses are to the north.

The regional park is not delineated as containing mineral resources and is not a known source of any mineral resources in the MRDS. Additionally, the park is not identified as a locally important mineral resource recovery site on any applicable land use plans. Prado Pit is considered a past producer by the MRDS and it is located just southwest of the regional park.

NOISE19 This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to noise. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only.

a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

NOISE FACTORS Noise can be defined as unwanted sound or combination of sounds that may interfere with conversation, work, rest, recreation, and sleep, or in the extreme may produce physiological or psychological damage. Sound travels from a source in the form of wave, which exerts pressure on a receptor such as a human ear. The amount of pressure a sound wave exerts is referred to as sound level, commonly measured in decibels (dB). As a reference, a sound level of zero dB corresponds roughly to the threshold of human hearing, and a sound level in the range of 120 to 140 dB can produce human pain. A noise study would be conducted as part of the environmental analysis associated with the proposed Master Plan to identify the locations of sensitive receptors within and adjacent to the park and quantify construction‐ related and operational noise levels and potential impacts anticipated to occur with implementation of the Master Plan. Operational noise levels would include those of proposed special events as will be identified in the proposed project alternatives. SENSITIVE RECEPTORS

19 US Army Corps of Engineers. 2013. Prado Dam and Bain – Groundwater Level Monitoring Wells. https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/portals/17/docs/publicnotices/prado_ieua_dea_groundwater_level_monitoring_wells_2013.pdf. Accessed September 2018.

The closest sensitive off‐site noise receptors are located approximately 1 mile west of the park, across SR‐71, and are composed of residential and school uses at the community of Butterfield Ranch and the Chino Hills Chinese School. Off‐site receptors will be analyzed in future noise impact analyses especially with respect to special events. ON‐SITE NOISE SOURCES Common noise sources in the park are vehicle noise, visitors, and shooting range, among others. Other sources of on‐site noise include special events that may include amplified sound. Sensitive noise receptors to noise and vibrations may include children and the elderly, as well as animals. Animals rely on meaningful sounds for communication, navigation, avoiding danger, and finding food. Behavioral and physiological responses of wildlife to noise have the potential to cause injury, energy loss, decrease food intake, habitat avoidance and abandonment, and reproductive losses. OFF‐SITE NOISE SOURCES Off‐site noise sources generally include transportation uses, including vehicular traffic from adjacent roadways and airplanes flying over the park. Significant existing noise sources include Euclid Avenue, SR‐71, and SR‐91 freeways; aircraft noise from Chino and Corona Municipal Airports; and rail traffic from the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad line, which runs east–west in the extreme southern basin.

PUBLIC SERVICES This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to public services. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only.

a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: I. Fire protection? II. Police protection? III. Schools? IV. Parks? V. Other public facilities?

FIRE PROTECTION The Chino Valley Fire Department Station 63 is located at 7550 Kimball Avenue, Chino, just south of the Chino Airport. Other nearby fire stations include the Riverside County Fire Department Station 31 and the Norco Fire Station 57. All stations are located within a 4‐mile range of Prado Regional Park.

A-16 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

POLICE PROTECTION

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

The Chino Police Department provides police protection services to the community of Chino, including the regional park. The Chino Police Department is located at 5450 Guardian Way in Chino. Additional police departments in the areas include the Norco Sheriff’s Station and Corona Police Department. All stations are located within a 6‐ mile range of Prado Regional Park.

This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to tribal cultural resources. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only. a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

TRANSPORTATION This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to transportation. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only. a. Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d. Result in inadequate emergency access? Vehicular access to Prado Regional Park is provided via a transportation network of regional and local roadways. Park access driveways to the various park uses are provided along SR‐83 (Euclid Avenue), Pine Avenue, and Pomona Rincon Road. SR‐71, which has partial cloverleaf interchange with SR‐83 (Euclid Avenue), provides regional access to the area. Exhibit 1 shows the current park activity areas (main park, golf course, Olympic shooting park, archery range, and equestrian center), the points of access, and the roadway network that provides direct access to park activity areas. Given the location of the park activity areas, SR‐83 (Euclid Avenue) and Pine Avenue are the primary access roadways. Access to the golf course is provided along Pine Avenue, west of SR‐83 (Euclid Avenue), while access to the equestrian center is provided along Johnson Avenue, which connects to Pine Avenue east of SR‐83 (Euclid Avenue). The Olympic shooting park and archery range have access along Pomona Rincon Road, which connects to SR‐83 (Euclid Avenue). The main park area entrance and exit points are provided via an intersection with SR‐83 (Euclid Avenue). A gate and pay station which all vehicles must travel through to gain access to the main park area is located approximately 500 feet from the SR‐83 (Euclid Avenue) intersection. Within the main park area, internal vehicular park circulation is via one main collector roadway that connects to the various parking areas. This internal circulation roadway begins at the main access gate near SR‐83 (Euclid Avenue), extends north of the lake, and connects to the RV parking and tent camping areas located east of the lake. Usage of the existing main park area was evaluated through an examination of the gate information. The number of vehicles entering the main park area varies by month and is impacted by events held at the park. Michael Baker International prepared a separate report, Prado Regional Park Vehicular Circulation Existing Conditions, containing in‐depth existing conditions assessment for the Prado Regional Park. This report is included as Attachment I.

At the time when SB 18 and AB 52 consultation must occur, the following industry best practices shall be applied: Different factors would trigger SB 18 and AB 52: For example: 

SB 18: Amendment or adoption of a general plan or a specific plan or designation of open space. A local government sends proposal information to the Native American Heritage Commission and requests contact information for tribes with traditional lands or places located in geographic area affected by proposed changes.



AB 52: Letters from tribes requesting notification by lead agency of projects in their areas of traditional or cultural affiliation.

Tribal consultation would then occur, as follows: 

SB 18: The local government contacts tribes about opportunity to consult and tribes have 90 days to request consultation.



AB 52: The lead agency contacts tribes that have requested notification of projects within 14 days of an application being complete or the lead agency’s decision to undertake a project. Tribes then have 30 days to request consultation.

Consultation Timeline 

SB 18: Does not have a statutory limit.



AB 52: No statutory limit, but the environmental documents cannot be released until consultation has been initiated. Environmental documents cannot be certified until consultation, if initiated, has concluded.

Consultation Conclusion

Appendices | A-17



SB 18 and AB 52: Consultation has concluded when parties reach mutual agreement concerning appropriate measures for preservation or mitigation; or when either party, acting in good faith or after reasonable effort, concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached concerning appropriate measures of preservation or mitigation.

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS This section discusses the environmental setting and existing conditions in relation to utilities and service systems. The CEQA Checklist is provided for context only.

a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

Existing utilities (sanitary sewer, water, and electric) serve the central portion of the park currently developed. Utilities are limited in the rest of the park.

A-18 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Appendix C: Environmental Strategies & Considerations

1.0

Background

This document is a summary of existing biological resources within the proposed Prado Regional Park Master Plan (referred to as “Master Plan”). In preparation of the summary, Michael Baker International conducted literature reviews and record searches to determine which special-status biological resources occur within the vicinity of the Master Plan.1 Special-status plant and wildlife species occurrence records within nine quadrangles2 inclusive of the Master Plan were determined through a query of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Additional information sources included Google Earth Pro Historical Aerial Imagery (Google 2019), the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA) Web Soil Survey, and the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan and associated technical documents. Michael Baker reviewed existing biological survey and geographic information systems (GIS) data provided by the Orange County Water District (OCWD 2018) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE 2018), and conducted field reviews on August 1 and November 28, 2018, to confirm and refine the extent of specific vegetation communities and land cover types that had been previously mapped within the Master Plan. General plant and wildlife species observations made during the field reviews were recorded in a field notebook. Plant nomenclature used in this memorandum follows The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition (Baldwin et al. 2012) and scientific names are provided immediately following common names of plant species (first reference only). Wildlife observations were made through aural and visual detection, as well as observation of sign including scat, trails, tracks, burrows, and nests. Although common names of wildlife species are well standardized, scientific names are provided immediately following common names of wildlife species in this memorandum (first reference only). Michael Baker International’s field reviews did not include a formal delineation of jurisdictional waters/wetlands or focused surveys for special-status species. 2.0

Summary of Existing Biological Conditions

Soils Michael Baker reviewed existing soil data provided by the USDA to identify specific soil units that have been mapped within the Master Plan. USDA soil units that have been identified within the boundaries of the Master Plan are depicted on Map 1, USDA Soils, in Attachment 1, and identified in Table 1 below. Table 1: USDA Soil Units within the Master Plan 1

“Special‐status” refers to plant and wildlife species that are federally‐ or state‐listed, proposed, or candidates; plant species that have been designated a California Rare Plant Rank by the California Native Plant Society; wildlife species that are designated as Fully Protected, Species of Special Concern, or Watch List species by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife; and species identified as locally rare or endemic to California. 2 Black Star Canyon, Corona North, Corona South, Guasti, Ontario, Orange, Prado Dam, San Dimas, and Yorba Linda, California U.S. Geological Survey 7.5‐minute topographic quadrangles.

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Soil Units1 Chino Silt Loam Chualar Clay Loam, 0 to 2% Slopes Chualar Clay Loam, 2 to 9% Slopes Chualar Clay Loam, 9 to 15% Slopes Cieneba Sandy Loam, 9 to 15% Slopes Cieneba-Rock Outcrop Complex Garretson Very Fine Sandy Loam, 2 to 9% Slopes Grangeville Fine Sandy Loam Grangeville Fine Sandy Loam, Saline-Alkali Greenfield Sandy Loam, 2 to 9% Slopes Ramona Sandy Loam, 2 to 9% Slopes Ramona Sandy Loam, 9 to 15% Slopes Ramona Sandy Loam, 15 to 30% Slopes, Eroded Ramona Sandy Loam, 0 to 5% Slopes, Severely Eroded Ramona Sandy Loam, 8 to 15% Slopes, Severely Eroded Saugus Sandy Loam, 30 to 50% Slopes Soper Gravelly Loam, 15 to 30% Slopes Soper Gravelly Loam, 30 to 50% Slopes Sorrento Clay Loam, 0 to 2% Slopes Sorrento Clay Loam, 2 to 5% Slopes Terrace Escarpments Water TOTAL* 1

Acreage 315.73 78.43 530.15 324.75 64.69 11.23 51.50 525.81 30.89 1.61 282.25 103.27 25.36 0.46 0.05 5.10 6.09 15.14 126.17 0.18 0.08 63.60 2,562.56

USDA 2019.

*Total may not equal sum due to rounding.

Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Based on a review of existing biological survey data provided by the OCWD (2018) and USACE (2018), seven general vegetation communities and land cover types occur within the Master Plan (refer to Attachment 1, Map 2, Vegetation and Land Cover). These vegetation communities and land cover types are identified in Table 2 below and described in the following sections. Table 2: Vegetation Communities and Land Cover within the Master Plan Vegetation Communities and Land Cover1

Acreage

Disturbed/Developed Land Grassland Agricultural Land

793.23 682.83 510.86

Riparian Scrub, Woodland, and Forest Open Water/Wetland Ornamental/Exotic Coastal Sage Scrub

425.21 88.42 58.02 3.99

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Appendices | A-19

TOTAL* 1

palm (Phoenix canariensis), Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta), tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), and eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.) also occur.

2,562.56

OCWD 2018, USACE 2018, and Michael Baker 2019.

Open Water/Wetland

*Total may not equal sum due to rounding.

Disturbed/Developed Disturbed/developed land encompasses approximately 793.23 acres (31%) of the Master Plan. This includes land that has been covered by permanent or semi-permanent structures, pavement, and hardscape, such as existing roadways and infrastructure associated with the Prado Regional Park, Prado Equestrian Center, El Prado Golf Course, Prado Olympic Shooting Park, Oranco Bowmen Archery Range, Prado Recreation Dog Training Park, Pomona Valley Model Airplane Club, and the SC Village Paintball and Airsoft Park. This land cover also includes areas of undeveloped land with heavily compacted/disturbed soils that are either completely devoid of vegetation or sparsely vegetated with non-native, ruderal plant species.

Grassland Grassland encompasses approximately 682.83 acres (27%) of the Master Plan. This includes areas of undeveloped land that are characterized by heavily disturbed soils that are dominated by annual grasses and other non-native, herbaceous plant species. Common plant species that occur within this vegetation community include brome (Bromus spp.), wild oat (Avena spp.), barley (Hordeum spp.), black mustard (Brassica nigra), short podded mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), bristly ox-tongue (Helminthotheca echioides), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), castor bean (Ricinus communis), and London rocket (Sisymbrium irio).

Agricultural Land Agricultural land encompasses approximately 510.86 acres (20%) of the Master Plan. This land cover includes areas that comprise active or abandoned agricultural fields, cropland, orchards (e.g., olive [Olea europaea]), and grazing lands. These lands do not support native vegetation communities and are instead composed of heavily disturbed soils that are routinely maintained as part of existing agricultural practices and/or vegetated with non-native, ruderal plant species.

Riparian Scrub, Woodland, and Forest Riparian scrub, woodland, and forest vegetation communities encompass approximately 425.21 acres (17%) of the Master Plan. These vegetation communities are dominated by emergent aquatic plants and riparian shrubs/trees and occur along the active channels and floodplain terraces of the main hydrologic features (such as Chino and Cucamonga Creeks) that occur within the Master Plan. Common plant species that occur within these vegetation communities include cattail (Typha spp.), bulrush (Schoenoplectus spp.), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), California mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana), mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), California sycamore (Platanus racemosa), Goodding’s black willow (Salix gooddingii), and arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepsis). Various non-native, invasive plant species such as Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium), Canary Island date

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Open water/wetland vegetation communities encompass approximately 88.42 acres (3%) of the Master Plan. This includes areas that contain surface water and/or are dominated by emergent, aquatic plant species. Specifically, these areas include existing basins, agricultural ponds, Prado Lake, Chino Creek, and Cucamonga Creek.

Ornamental/Exotic Ornamental/exotic vegetation communities encompass approximately 58.02 acres (2%) of the Master Plan. Common exotic plant species that occur with these areas include tamarisk (Tamarix ramosissima), athel tamarisk (Tamarix aphylla), eucalyptus, and giant reed (Arundo donax).

Coastal Sage Scrub Coastal sage scrub encompasses approximately 3.99 acres (<1%) of the Master Plan. This vegetation community occurs in two isolated areas on land situated above the active floodplains of Chino and Cucamonga Creeks. Common plant species that occur within this vegetation community include California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), and coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis). State and Federal Jurisdictional Features Three key agencies regulate activities within inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California. The USACE Regulatory Division regulates discharge of dredge or fill materials into waters of the U.S. (WoUS) pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA). Of the state agencies, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulates discharges to surface waters of the State pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and the Section 13263 of the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and the CDFW regulates alterations to lake, streambed, and associated vegetation communities under Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC). The Master Plan is located within the Chino Groundwater Basin (Basin) which is traversed by a series of ephemeral, intermittent, and perennial streams that include the following: Chino Creek, San Antonio Creek, Cucamonga Creek, Deer Creek, Day Creek, Etiwanda Creek, and San Sevaine Creek. The principal drainage course through the Basin is the Santa Ana River. It flows 69 miles across the Santa Ana Watershed from its origin in the San Bernardino Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. The Santa Ana River enters the Basin at the Riverside Narrows and flows along the southern boundary of the Basin to the Prado Flood Control Reservoir, where it is eventually discharged through the outlet at Prado Dam and flows the remainder of its course to the Pacific Ocean. Chino Creek, Cucamonga Creek, Prado Lake, and several other hydrologic features (e.g., drainages, ponds, and detention basins) occur within the Master Plan and would likely fall under the regulatory authority of the USACE, Santa Ana RWQCB, and CDFW.

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

A-20 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Sensitive Natural Communities Sensitive natural communities are those that are listed in the CNDDB due to the rarity of the community in the state or throughout its entire range (globally). Ten sensitive natural communities were identified during the literature review as either occurring within the Master Plan or the surrounding vicinity (refer to Attachment C). Based on a review of the CNDDB and data provided by the OCWD (2018) and USACE (2018), the following sensitive natural communities have been documented within the Master Plan: California Walnut Woodland, Southern California Arroyo Chub/Santa Ana Sucker Stream, Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest, Southern Riparian Forest, Southern Riparian Scrub, Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland, and Southern Willow Scrub.

Critical habitat designations for federally listed species within the Master Plan are depicted on Map 3, Critical Habitat, and identified in Table 3 below. Table 3: Critical Habitat for Federally Listed Species within the Master Plan Federally Listed Species1 Status Acreage Least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) Western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis)

Endangered

1,760.39

Endangered

225.27

Endangered

368.36

1USFWS 2019.

Special-Status Plant and Wildlife Species

3.0

A total of 117 special-status plant and wildlife species were identified during the literature review as either occurring within the Master Plan or the surrounding vicinity; seven are currently listed as either threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and CDFW under the federal Endangered Species Act and California Endangered Species Act (refer to Attachments B and C). Based on a review of CNDDB and CNPS occurrence records, the following special-status plant and wildlife species have been documented within the Master Plan or the immediate vicinity: Braunton’s milk-vetch (Astragalus brauntonii), Jokerst’s monardella (Monardella australis ssp. jokerstii), many-stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis), salt spring checkerbloom (Sidalcea neomexicana), smooth tarplant (Centromadia pungens ssp. laevis), southern California black walnut (Juglans californica), arroyo chub (Gila orcuttii), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica), northern leopard frog (Lithobates pipiens), orange-throated whiptail (Aspidoscelis hyperythra), Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae), southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps canescens), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus), western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis), least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), yellow rail (Coturnicops noveboracensis), yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia), and yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens).

Based on the information presented above, the following technical studies would likely be needed to analyze potential impacts to biological resources and support preparation of the environmental document:

Additional Technical Studies and Analysis



Biological Resources Assessment: A biological resources assessment would need to be conducted to document existing biological conditions within the Master Plan and identify any sensitive natural communities, special-status species or suitable habitat, or other protected resources, as well as potential impacts that may occur to such resources as a result of the Master Plan. The assessment should be conducted by a qualified biologist and summarize the results of all database queries, literature reviews, and field surveys that were conducted to provide a detailed and accurate account of the biological resources that occur within the Master Plan.



Jurisdictional Delineation: Chino Creek, Cucamonga Creek, Prado Lake, and several other hydrologic features (e.g., drainages, ponds, and detention basins) occur within the Master Plan and would likely fall under the regulatory authority of the USACE, Santa Ana RWQCB, and CDFW pursuant to Sections 401 and 404 of the CWA, and Section 1600 et seq. of the CFGC. Therefore, in the event that the USACE has not complete on, a formal jurisdictional delineation should be conducted to identify the extent/limits of state and federal jurisdictional resources (e.g., WoUS, wetlands, streambed, riparian) within the Master Plan, analyze potential impacts, and identify any regulatory permits, approvals, or mitigation that may be required prior to implementation of the Master Plan. Examples of regulatory permits/approvals that may be required include, but may not be limited to, the following: 1) Nationwide or Individual Permit from the USACE for impacts to WoUS and wetlands; 2) Water Quality Certification and/or Waste Discharge Requirements from the RWQCB for impacts to WoUS and surface waters; or 3) Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW for impacts to streambed/riparian habitats.



Focused Species Surveys: Focused surveys would need to be conducted to confirm the presence and location of any special-status species (e.g., rare plants, Santa Ana sucker, burrowing owl, western yellow-billed cuckoo, southwestern willow flycatcher, least Bell’s

Critical Habitat for Federally Listed Species Under the federal Endangered Species Act, “critical habitat” is designated by the USFWS at the time of listing of a species or within one year of listing and refers to specific areas within the geographical range of a species at the time it is listed that include the physical or biological features essential to the survival and eventual recovery of that species. Maintenance of these physical and biological features requires special management considerations or protection, regardless of whether individual species are present or not. Based on a review of the USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report (USFWS 2019), portions of land within the Master Plan have been designated as critical habitat for least Bell’s vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and western yellow-billed cuckoo.

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Appendices | A-21

vireo) within the Master Plan. The surveys would need to be conducted by qualified biologists in accordance with current regulatory guidelines and protocols that have been established by USFWS and CDFW. The results of the focused surveys would be used to analyze potential impacts to special-status species and identify any regulatory permits, approvals, or mitigation that may be required prior to implementation of the Master Plan. 4.0

Park Development and Habitat Conservation

The protection and management of existing wetland and riparian communities is essential to the conservation of several sensitive natural communities and special-status plant and wildlife species that occur within the Master Plan and surrounding vicinity, including Santa Ana sucker, southwestern willow flycatcher, western yellow-billed cuckoo, and least Bell’s vireo. Therefore, restoration within the Master Plan should focus on maintaining and enhancing existing wetland/riparian communities, specifically along the riparian corridors that exist along Chino and Cucamonga Creeks, through the control of non-native, invasive species, removal of fill material to decrease the elevation and create additional habitat, and establishment of adjacent upland buffer to reduce potential edge effects such as the introduction of non-native species, illegal dumping, and trespass. The costs associated with restoration varies depending on the habitat type (e.g., wetland, riparian, upland), but generally ranges from $75,000 to $100,000 per acre. Maintenance and monitoring of restoration sites typically occur for five years, or until success criteria are met, as determined by the USACE, RWQCB, or CDFW. Maintenance activities may include, but may not be limited to, routine plant inspection, management of non-native, invasive plant species, irrigation, replacement of native plant species, and the removal of trash and debris. Monitoring of restoration sites is typically conducted on a yearly basis using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Once annual maintenance and monitoring activities are complete, a yearly monitoring report would be prepared and submitted to the regulatory agencies for review and concurrence. The County could also potentially work with the regulatory agencies to identify a program or mechanism that would allow for private entities that require compensatory mitigation to offset the loss of protected resources (e.g., WoUS, wetlands, streambed, riparian) to finance these or other future restoration activities within the Master Plan.

REFERENCES Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, Editors. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2019. RareFind 5, California Natural Diversity Database, California. Threatened, endangered, rare or otherwise sensitive species and communities for the Black Star Canyon, Corona North, Corona South, Guasti, Ontario, Orange, Prado Dam, San Dimas, and Yorba Linda, California USGS 7.5‐minute quadrangles. https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps‐and‐Data. CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2019. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8‐03 0.39). http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Google, Inc. 2019. Google Earth Pro version 7.3.2.5491, build date 7/23/2018. Historical aerial imagery from 1994 to 2018. Michael Baker International. 2019. OCWD (Orange County Water District). 2018. USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2018. USDA (US Department of Agriculture). 2019. Custom Soil Resources Report for San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 2019. USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical‐habitat.html. ATTACHMENTS A. Maps B. CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California Results C. CDFW California Natural Diversity Database Results

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

A-22 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

ATTACHMENT A. Maps 1. 2. 3. 4.

USDA Soils Vegetation and Land Cover Critical Habitat Habitat Sensitivity

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Appendices | A-23

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

A-24 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

ATTACHMENT B. CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California Results

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Appendices | A-25

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

A-26 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

ATTACHMENT C. CDFW California Natural Diversity Database Results

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Appendices | A-27

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

A-28 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

Appendices | A-29

Biological Resources Summary ‐ Prado Regional Park Master Plan

A-30 | Prado Regional Park Master Plan

This Page Left Intentionally Blank