Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998/06/10 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting June 10, 1998 Chairman Barker called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:20 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Ddve, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, William Bethel, Larry McNiel ABSENT: Rich Macias, Peter Tolstoy STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Brent Le Count, Associate Planner NEW BUSINESS A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 98-06 - BARRATT - A request for Design Review for Tract 13316, a previously approved tract consisting of 123 lots on 84 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (less that 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, north of Carrari Street - APN: 210-071-14, 37, and 45. Brad Bullet, City Planner, explained the purpose and goals of the Pre-Application Review process. David Jadnto, representative from Ban'afl, indicated that this is a previously approved project which his group has inherited. He said the project will have fiat pads per the previous approval but Barratt is proposing two story homes designed to meet the building envelope requirements of the Hillside Ordinance. Bart Crandell, project architect, indicated that the pads are wide and flat and the homes would be built within the building envelope. He said there are 3 one-story and 3 two-story home plans proposed. He commented the proposal is diverse because there are six overall plan types, each with four elevations with color variation. He said substantial setbacks are proposed. Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, indicated that the reason for holding the Pre-Application Review is that the previous approval included a condition limiting development to one-story homes with a caveat that any two-story home proposal would require an entirely new design consistent with the Hillside Ordinance. He said the applicant is attempting to utilize the previously approved grading, a mass grading concept with-fiat pads, and add two-story homes. He observed applicant's justification is that the homes, whether one- or two-story, meet the building envelope requirements of the Hillside Ordinance even though they are proposed on fiat pads instead of being designed to fit the terrain. He indicated the Commission is being asked its opinion as to whether this is an appropriate direction to take. Commissioner McNiel asked what the existing grade of the site is. Mr. Jacinto indicated that the grade is approximately 12 percent. Commissioner McNiel asked how much grading is proposed. Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, indicated that the proposal involves significant grading and that the site is more like 16 percent natural average grade. Commissioner McNiel questioned what kind of precedent this type of development would set. Mr. Buller indicated that surrounding home developments to the west and south have typical mass graded fiat pads with fiat land style homes, and to the east the Woods development also has flat graded pads with homes nestled in amongst Eucalyptus Trees. He pointed out that other large tracts have been built that don't technically meet the Hillside Ordinance so this would not be the first. He commented this project has a significant history of resolving design issues which happened before the Hillside Ordinance went into effect. He noted there is a recorded map and an approved conceptual grading plan. He said the design issue before the Commission was whether to allow two- story homes without stepping the pads. He believed the project's history is unique enough that it would not be precedent setting to look at various design options. Chairman Barker indicated that there are really two issues at hand; one is whether a fiat pad grading concept is acceptable and the other is whether two-story homes are appropriate. He raised the question of what the impact of two-story homes would be given the type of te~ain involved. Mr. Jacinto said that the homes are designed to meet the building envelope. Mr. Bullet indicated that the odginal requirement for one-story only homes was intended to minimize the visual impact of the project and obviously, two-story homes would have that much more of a visual impact. Commissioner McNiel remarked he is not sure what the proper mix of one-story and two-story homes would be, but that the site is surrounded by developments of similar style and the front elevations look good. He did not necessarily have a problem with the applicant's proposal but stated side and rear elevations should have as much quality of design as the front. Chairman Barker stressed the importance of 360-degree architecture, with all elevations of the best possible quality. He felt that is especially true for this type of development where an up-slope neighbor has views of a down-slope neighbor's rear elevation. He expressed concern about the impact of two-story homes and said the applicant will have to demonstrate that views to the valley and views to the mountains will not be degraded by the project. He voiced concern about drainage issues. He felt the focus should be on the total environment created by the project rather than home-to-home details. If the project does not negatively impact existing surrounding properties, he was not opposed to two-story development. He commended the project architect for the hidden garage design, and said he hopes to see more of such quality design. Mr. Jacinto asked the Commission to elaborate on how to demonstrate that the project will not have negative visual impacts. Chairman Barker said that the project should not just be looked at in terms of street scape but also in terms of flow from east to west and nodh to south, flow of terrain. He felt it will be difficult to add two-story homes to the projec~'without increasing visual impacts and said the homes must be properly plotted to avoid these impacts. Mr. Jacinto claimed that mixing one- and two-story home provides more visual variety because of the variation in roof lines. PC Adjourned Minutes -2- June 10, 1998 Mr. Bullet observed that the Hillside Ordinance requires homes to be designed to fit the terrain. He felt the argument of providing vadety by mixing one- and two-story homes is really a flat land design method and does not necessarily apply in this case. Commissioner Bethel did not support the two-story proposal. He voiced concerns about two-story homes without stepping the pads. He was not convinced that adding various tack-on elements such as shutters and different architectural styles, such as Mediterranean and Craftsman, can be developed using the same overall home massing from home to home. He felt the project should be designed in full conformance with the Hillside Ordinance. He feared that by allowing the project to proceed, the City is allowing a dangerous precedent for future hillside development. Commissioner McNiel thought the overall concept is well founded. Given the surrounding development, he did not feel the terraced grading concept with two-story homes will have a negative visual impact. He recommends focusing on preserving views between homes rather than over homes. He felt homes should not have repetitive roof lines. He reminded the group that the City does not have any legislation designed to protect views. Mr. Bullet summarized the Commissioner's comments. He stated the Commission appears reluctant to allow two-story homes without very careful attention to plotting and design to minimize visual impacts. He commented that staff can work with the applicant to plot homes based upon the three-dimensional building envelope volume to maximize view corridor opportunities and minimize visual impacts. He said two-story high walls, without one-story elements such as side and rear elevations presented tonight, should have one-story elements so that the mass of homes flows with the terrain. Mr. Buller reminded the Commissioners that when the tract was originally processed, neighbors living along Carrari Street were very concerned about having two-story homes along the south project boundary and that the tract to the south is the most vulnerable to potential visual impacts from the subject project. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes -3- June 10, 1998