No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005/06/08 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting June 8, 2005 Chairman Macias called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:15 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Rich Macias, Larry McNiel,Cristine McPhail, Pam Stewart ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner, Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Michael Diaz, Senior Planner, Joe Stofa, Associate Engineer; Rozalynne Thompson, Contract Planner NEW BUSINESS A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2005-00448 - ETCO DEVELOPMENT - A proposed subdivision of 8.90 acres of land into up to 12 lots in the Very Low Residential District, located at the northwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and 1-210 Freeway-APN: 0225-171-19. Brad Buller, City Planner, introduced the item and gave an overview of the Pre-Application Review process. He emphasized that the purpose of the workshop was to review the proposed subdivision's layout and its relationship to the surrounding area. He stated that the parcel before the Commissioners was one of the City's remnant parcels bounded by the 210 freeway to the south, single-family developments to the west and north, and Etiwanda Avenue to the east. He then added that the applicant submitted two proposals for the Commissioners to consider. He commented the first proposed 12 lots, all of which would have direct access to Vintage Drive; and the second layout addressed the Traffic Engineer's request to eliminate direct access on Vintage Avenue by proposing cul-de-sacs. He concluded by stating that the primary issue about the subdivision is that of safety because Vintage Drive is designed to be a busy collector street in the City. Steve Schapel, representing Etco Investments, described the two layouts. He stated that Etco Investments and the owner favored the first design because it allows a greater number of lots. He agreed with Mr. Buller that the second design was in response to traffic comments. Mr. Schapel then presented an alternative to both proposals. In an alternative layout,he proposed shared access drives for every two lots. Rozalynne Thompson, Contract Planner, gave a brief overview of the project. She stated that the key issue is whether a perfect solution for the layout of the parcels is obtainable. She then stated that after considering the key City's development standards, including traffic circulation, staff prefers the original proposal rather than the recently submitted one. Ms. Thompson believed that the first proposal is more favorable from a livability and long-term maintenance standpoint because the home pads have greater setbacks from the 210 freeway and Vintage Drive,there are fewer potential deep street side yard landscape areas that are difficult to maintain, and horse corrals will meet the minimum setback of 70 feet. She acknowledged the second proposal is more favorable from a traffic circulation standpoint; however, she noted that Lots 3, 5, and 8 of the this proposal would not have direct access to the local trail located to the south of the existing parcel. Finally, she added that there might be an issue as to whether the horse corrals, especially the one on Lot 9, could comply with the minimum 70-foot setback. Mr. Buller stated that there were additional issues for the Commission to consider including the issue of the maintenance of the local trail on the north side of Vintage Drive. He said they should also consider the layout of the lots with frontage along Etiwanda Avenue because the garages of those residences should be directed away from Etiwanda Avenue. Finally, Mr. Buller recommended that an attractive, single-story home should be developed on lot 12 (lot 11 in the second layout). He then concluded the overview and tumed the discussion over to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Stewart preferred the first layout to the second. However, she doubted that Lot 12 of Exhibit I would be viable because she feared a lot of such a configuration and size could become unsightly. Furthermore, she cautioned that off-street parking must be heavily regulated and available to guests. She suggested driveways with an attractive and user-friendly hammerhead design might work. Commissioner McNiel thought that the first layout is a superior plan. He anticipated that traffic traveling through Vintage Drive would be lighter than surrounding streets. Although he would prefer guest parking, he concurred with Commissioner Stewart's recommendation of access driveways with hammerheads. He stated that Lot 12 of Exhibit I presents the same problem as other lots with dual frontages. Commissioner McPhail agreed with both Commissioners Stewart and McNiel. She stated that she would like to see Lot 12 of Exhibit I as a pocket park for the community. Commissioner Fletcher commented he preferred the first layout because it meets more Development Code requirements, especially relating to trails. He recommended that the two homes on Lots 11 and 12 either front Etiwanda Avenue or be designed so that the sides of the houses look like an additional front of the home. He added that the driveways must provide as much off-street parking and decorative paving on the site as possible and that Lots 11 and 12 need to be designed as upscale as possible. Chairman Macias agreed with all the comments made by the other Commissioners. He concurred with the other Commissioners that something unique must be done on Lot 12 of Exhibit I. Mr. Buller concluded that the consensus of the Commissioners was that they would support the first layout of the subdivision, provided that the developer considers the unique characteristics of Lot 12 of Exhibit I and site and design the residence accordingly. B. PRELIMINARY REVIEW DRC2005-00273 - SHEA HOMES — Discussion of proposed architectural designs for 310 condominiums on 18.32 acres (gross) at the southeast corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Church Street within the Victoria Gardens Master Plan - APN: 0207-161-48. Attending the meeting were Steve Wesson from Forest City and Joe Stucker and John Young from the Lewis Operating Corporation. City Planner Buller opened the meeting and gave a general overview of the architectural guidelines and direction for the area. He invited the representatives for Shea Homes to present their design concepts for the architecture of the new units. PC Adjourned Minutes -2- June 8, 2005 Overall, the Commission was supportive of the project and excited about the potential for having a high quality residential development to complement Victoria Gardens. The general consensus of the Commission was that the architectural designs as presented were a good start, but that further refinement was necessary. Most of the Commissioners felt that more emphasis should be given to the development of high quality architectural details (e.g., windows, doors, overhangs, building materials) to enhance the proposed architecture. However, Commissioner Stewart felt that too much detailing would be counterproductive and that the designs should emphasize clean lines with fewer, yet high quality, details. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, u Approved: June 22, 2005 PC Adjoumed Minutes -3- June 8, 2005