Western Inland Empire: Seeking the Proper Mix

As seen through the car window on a trip to Las Vegas or Palm Springs, much of the western end of the Inland Empire looks the same.

But there are important differences among the communities in this fast-growing region, some of which are described in the following sketches:

CHINO

Incorporated: 1910 Size: 16 square miles Population: 47,950 Median household income: $24,969 Taxable Sales: $229,889,000 (1983-84 fiscal year) New residential units, 1984 737

Once a quiet horse lover’s paradise, this city of 48,000 has doubled its population since 1979 and is now a busy suburb. Chino still has an annual “Basque picnic” and the Basco Centro is a popular restaurant, but few Basque shepherds remain because the grazing land is almost gone.

New housing tracts have replaced many of the old horse farms.

One that remains is Green Thumb Stables, a 45-acre spread belonging to Earl Scheib, the auto-painting king. Fran’s Valentine, a Green Thumb Stables thoroughbred, has won seven major stakes races this year.

“It’s a shame what’s happening,” said Green Thumb trainer Matt Griffin. “When I came out here 27 years ago, there were horse ranches and dairies all around. Chino was a beautiful place.”

Most of the dairies are still there--in a 17,000-acre agricultural preserve east of Chino--but it is thought to be only a matter of time before most of that land is annexed for housing developments.

Despite the suburbanization trend, Chino Mayor Larry Walker thinks it will be possible to retain the “rural heritage . . . and I don’t just mean a wagon wheel design on a condo complex.”

Chino’s schools are among the most crowded in the Inland Empire, a problem that must be solved if the city’s ambitious growth plans are to be realized. The school board is embroiled in a bitter fight over how much developers should pay for construction of new schools.

So far, most of Chino’s growth has been residential, but the city is “progressively pursuing industry for the first time,” said Carol Gallo, manager of the Chamber of Commerce.

Additional tax revenue from new commercial and industrial enterprises is sorely needed if Chino is to provide required services for its rapidly growing population.

Chino Hills

Only about 8,000 people now live in this unincorporated, highly prized region of 40,000 acres southwest of the city of Chino and just east of the Los Angeles County line.

But the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors has approved a plan for 18,000 of these acres that would yield 30,000 new housing units, and a population of 100,000, in the next 15 years. The question is whether the plan will work.

So far, more than 9,000 units have been approved by county planners, but building permits have been issued for only 22, according to Dick Rieker, Chino Hills regional manager.

Partly this is because “builders are cautious just now,” said Gary Brown, executive director of the Baldy View chapter of the Building Industry Assn. “The buying market doesn’t seem to be that strong for the expensive homes that will be built there.”

Another reason is skepticism about the Chino Hills financing plan.

In order to keep developer fees as low as possible (about $7,450 per housing unit), the Board of Supervisors approved a plan that includes a complex combination of fees, special assessment districts and local and state revenues. All of these are supposed to provide at least $600 million for schools, roads, sewers and other facilities that are needed if the area is to be developed.

So far, however, developer fees are not generating enough cash to pay the debt service on the bonds needed to build some of these facilities.

The financing plan also calls for the state to contribute $350 million, mostly for new roads and schools, but many knowledgeable observers think this is an unrealistic expectation since the state has been reducing its spending in both areas.

“I think the plan will work, but it’s still up in the air,” said a representative of one of the Chino Hills development companies, who asked not to be identified. “We’re breaking a lot of new ground here and we’re running into a lot of small problems. I think they can all be worked out if we realize the long-range goal is a good one.”

But a Chino school official, who also requested anonymity, offered another appraisal: “I think the whole plan is falling apart. I think they’re in real trouble up there.”

CORONA

Founded: 1886 Incorporated: 1896 Size: 24.1 square miles Population: 43,350 Median household income: $20,693 Taxable Sales: $333,547,000 (1984 calendar year) Residential Units, 1984: 584

After several years of sluggish growth, largely due to limited sewer capacity, this city of 43,350 at the western end of Riverside County now is spurting ahead.

City officials expect more than 800 new housing units to be built this year, topping the previous high of 700. They talk confidently of 2,000 units a year in the future.

“I don’t see any limit on the area’s growth,” said City Manager Jim Wheaton. “We can provide the necessary municipal services for the foreseeable future and we’re planning for the years ahead.”

Wheaton added, “Our real challenge now, and I hope we’re ready for it, is, in an even-handed, fair, reasonable way, to try to assure quality in the development that does come in.”

To assure permanent school buildings for the rapid enrollment increases that will accompany this growth, the Corona-Norco Unified School District charges stiff developer fees--up to $5,800 per new housing unit--and sues builders who balk at paying the fees.

The school board also has established special assessment districts, in which developer fees are used to pay the debt service on school construction bonds.

Some builders protest the high fees and warn that they will limit growth in Corona, but so far this has not happened.

Corona’s efforts to balance residential development with new commercial and industrial activity received a big boost when a British-Danish-Irish company decided to build a $100-million cheese manufacturing plant, said to be the world’s largest, in the city.

The plant will open in October and is expected to produce 80 million pounds of cheese a year, in addition to whey powder and industrial alcohol.

NORCO

Incorporated: 1964 (formerly an unincorporated area known as “North Corona”) Size: 15 square miles Population: 22,100 Median household income: $25,386 Taxable Sales: $45,926,000 (1984 calendar year) New residential units, 1984: 26

Just north of Corona lies the horse-loving city of Norco, one of the few Inland Empire cities that is not interested in growing.

Horses and other animals far outnumber the 22,100 residents, a fact to which the nostrils attest on warm days when the breeze is not stirring.

Norco does its best to live up to its slogan, “City living in a rural atmosphere.” There are few sidewalks or traffic signals. A city ordinance prevents a driveway from extending to the street if it crosses a horse trail. Only half of the city has sewers. There is a city Streets and Trails Commission.

Much of Norco is zoned for minimum half-acre lots and for the keeping of “large animals.” Most of these “large animals” are horses, but there are also cows, mules, sheep, goats and at least one herd of llamas.

But city leaders know they must attract some new industry if this bucolic way of life is to be preserved.

“We need new industry,” City Councilwoman Naomi Feagan said. “If we are going to keep this life style, we must broaden the tax base.”

Feagan believes Norco has several attractions for manufacturers--good location, plenty of industrially zoned land and a hookup to a “brine line” that can carry industrial sewage.

Even if the quest for new industry is successful, however, Norco’s character is not likely to change. The horses, the odors and the “Goats for Sale” signs will still be there.

“People get scared anytime there’s a threat to animal keeping,” the mayor said. “Most of them are from Orange County--they have been zoned out before, and they are afraid it could happen again.”

Said Community Development Director Ralph (Bud) Plender, “We anticipate that, in time, we’ll be a real island out here.”

ONTARIO

Incorporated: 1891 Size: 47 square miles Population: 108,100 Median household income: $19,076 Taxable Sales: $785,954,800 (1984-85 fiscal year) New residential units, 1984: 423

Sometimes it does not seem so, but there is more to the city of Ontario than the airport. In fact, the airport and its 1,450 acres belong to the city of Los Angeles and provide almost no tax revenue for Ontario, a sore point with some city officials.

With a population of slightly more than 108,000, Ontario is the second-largest city in San Bernardino County. Some believe that by the end of the century it will be the county’s largest city, as well as its financial center.

Residential growth has been relatively slow in recent years, however, because most of the possible sites have been developed. But the city has its eye on the 17,000-acre “dairylands” agricultural preserve to the south.

“I think that’s going to be our future residential area,” said Robert Jackson, Ontario’s deputy city manager and director of development. “I visualize, in time, the cows will slowly disappear.”

The city hopes to rejuvenate its somewhat seedy downtown, especially the cheap bars and rickety trailer courts along Holt Avenue, with redevelopment projects.

Distribution Centers Built

Several large warehouses and distribution centers have been built in recent years--K mart, Mervyn’s, Nordstrom, Chrysler auto parts.

“In some ways this is good and in some ways not so good,” Jackson said. “They tend to take up a lot of space, but they don’t produce much tax revenue and they offer few jobs.”

The city has launched a vigorous campaign for new industry, to complement the distribution centers.

There is some tension between the “old” Ontario--downtown and the older residential neighborhoods--and the “new” Ontario that is taking shape east of Vineyard Avenue--in the big commercial enterprises like California Commerce Center and Ontario Center.

“Ontario has always had a pro-growth reputation and still does,” said Brent Hunter, manager of the Chamber of Commerce. “We need these new jobs. But the town is going through some adjustments. People are asking, ‘What’s happening to our community?’ ”

RANCHO CUCAMONGA

Incorporated: 1977 Size: 33 square miles Population: 65,500 Median household income: $24,868 Taxable sales: $235,000,000 (1984-85 fiscal year) New residential units, 1984: 2,300

Until 1977 there was no such place, but now this is the fastest-growing city in California among those in the 50,000 to 100,000 population range. Population jumped 6.2% during 1984, to a total of 65,500, the state Department of Finance reported.

Residents of Alta Loma, Cucamonga and Etiwanda decided to form the new city of Rancho Cucamonga because of “dissatisfaction with county planning policies and with the level of county services,” said City Manager Lauren M. Wasserman.

These complaints included failure to provide enough schools, housing developments that were built without proper storm drains and slow response time by San Bernardino County sheriff’s deputies, Wasserman said.

Another reason for incorporation was “fear of being taken over by other cities,” Mayor Jon D. Mikels said. “We saw Guasti, which used to be called ‘South Cucamonga,’ annexed by Ontario, and we didn’t want that to happen to us.”

Traditional rivalries among the three communities have made agreement on plans for the new city difficult. Alta Loma, for many years a prosperous community controlled by citrus growers, tended to look down, both literally and figuratively, on Cucamonga and Etiwanda.

In the 1977 vote, Cucamonga supported incorporation decisively, Etiwanda, by a smaller margin, and Alta Loma voted narrowly against the proposal.

Old Attitudes Persist

Even now, many residents defiantly insist that they live in Alta Loma or Cucamonga or Etiwanda and pretend never to have heard of Rancho Cucamonga, which is named for the original Spanish land grant in the region.

Separate post offices and ZIP codes, separate phone book listings and five different school districts have done little to help the drive for civic unity.

But Rancho Cucamonga has begun to develop its own identity, partly because there are so many new residents with no ties to the old communities.

Residential growth has been rapid. Building permits for 2,200 new housing units were granted last year.

Building and design standards are high--too high for some developers who say they have left Rancho Cucamonga land empty rather than try to meet these demanding standards.

The city contains some of the finest residential areas in San Bernardino County. A typical Rancho Cucamonga house was recently appraised at $187,000, according to a survey by the Real Estate Council of Southern California.

But the city also contains one of the county’s oldest and poorest barrios, which was described as “an island of poverty amidst all of that affluence” by political scientist Armando Navarro, who was raised there.

Plenty of land within the city’s 33 square miles has been zoned for commercial and industrial development.

Regional Distribution Centers

Several large regional distribution centers are now located in Rancho Cucamonga, among them Frito Lay, Pic ‘n’ Save, Coca-Cola and Schwinn bicycles.

General Dynamics is the largest manufacturer in the city, employing abut 1,200 people to make tactical military weapons.

The company has purchased an additional 320 acres, presumably to expand, but has made no announcement about when this might take place or how many additional people might be hired.

New industries include Tokai, a Japanese firm that produces disposable lighters.

New office buildings and commercial establishments near the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue are expected to generate 15,000 to 20,000 jobs in the next 10 years.

Along the way, agriculture has pretty much disappeared.

Once there were 20,000 acres of vineyards in Cucamonga, but now there are only about 5,000, and most of these are awaiting the developers’ bulldozers.

Most of the lemon growers have given up too.

“As the cost of land went up and the price of lemons went down, it just became economically impossible,” City Manager Wasserman said.

Some Rancho Cucamonga enthusiasts talk about the city as a “new Irvine,” where high-tech industry and an affluent life style will flourish.

Neutral observers say this is unlikely, but they do believe Rancho Cucamonga has a much better chance than most Inland Empire communities to achieve a balanced mix of high-quality residential, commercial and industrial development.

Sources: 1980 U.S. Census, the State Department of Finance and the city administrative offices and Chambers of Commerce in the various cities.