Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/05/13 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting May13,1998 Chairman Barker called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning . Commission to order at 8:50 p.m. The meeting was held in the De Anza Room at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. .ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, William Bethel, Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Bullet, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Elline Garcia; Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Brent Le Count, Associate Planner NEW BUSINESS A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 98-05 - RANCHO SUMMIT LLC - Consideration of a 343 lot single family subdivision on 132 acres in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of Wilson Avenue and Wardman Bullock Road - APN: 226-102-17. Brad Bullet, City Planner, introduced the project. Ray Allard, Allard Engineering, discussed the regional setting of the project and outlined the specific site setting and approved projects in the area. Steve Stewart, one of the project partners, indicated the site had been purchased in January of 1998. He outlined the design proposals which include: 1) Basic design standards proposal (343-1ot subdivision), and 2) Optional design standards (a 390-1ot proposal). He felt that both of these designs meet the intent of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and would provide adequate infrastructure for the area. He said the project would also complete the roadway system in the area. Mr. Allard discussed both the optional and basic design standards - He said Option 1 (343 lots) meets design standards except the minimum average lot size. He emphasized the challenges in the area, particularly the flood control issues. He also emphasized that the lot yield is important to the viability of the development. He felt the proposal meets the intent of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Mr. Stewart expressed the opinion that the open space provided on the west side of the project site (390-1ot option) would enhance flood control measures and meet the intent of the Fish and Game Wildlife concerns. He said they are willing to work with the City on open space, locations. Mr. Stewart acknowledged the existence of Eucalyptus trees on-site which will require future direction and policy. He felt that the lot count would provide infrastructure financing, and that both design options meet the intent of the Specific Plan and would blend well with the existing approved tracts in the area. Elline Garcia, Associate Planner, outlined the issues critical to the proposals. These included, density standards which were not being met in either design proposal, the neighboring tract densities which are not consistent with the proposals, the historic olive grove, and the ability of the applicant to successfully argue the necessity of a Specific Plan Amendment. She felt it was questionable whether the Planning Commission could make the findings to support an amendment to the Specific Plan to reduce the required minimum average lot size for this site. Mr. Buller summed up the history of the density standards as they were put together when the Efiwanda Specific Plan was developed. Commissioner McNiel questioned where the channel will be located and the location of the stand of olive trees. He also asked whether the product would be the same on both projects, or had that been determined as yet. Mr. Stewart indicated the product has not yet been determined, but that the smaller lots in Option 2 would necessitate a different product. Commissioner Bethel felt the open space proposed in Option 2 was not useful to the neighborhood. He thought thero would need to be an intermixing of open space throughout the site. He felt that the two proposals were extreme and there needs to be a compromise between the two and the lots are just too small. Commissioner McNiel supported development of the property in Etiwanda, but felt that the optional development standards were thrown in for reduced lot size. Brad Buller pointed out that even Option 1 does not meet the minimum average lot size and asked if the average should be amended? Commissioner Tolstoy felt the optional development standard proposal did not show something special, and that a better use of open space should be utilized. He thought both options should meet minimum standards. Commissioner Macias concurred with Commissioner Tolstoy. He did not think he could support an amendment to the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Chairman Barker reminded the Commissioners of the history of the area, saying the residents wanted Iow density and that even the Low Residential designation had been somewhat of a compromise. He thought that allowing an even lower density would be contrary to the Plan. He felt utilizing the optional development standards should be a reward for exemplary design, which he did not think was depicted in these plans. He said he was not inclined to reduce density further in the area. Commissioner McNiel concurred with Chairman Barker that the optional standards must show something special in design, Commissioner Tolstoy stated he likes innovation and would be willing to look at optional development standards proposed in an innovative plan, but he felt the proposal before the Commission was not innovative. Mr. Bullet summarized the Commission's comments. He said the Commission generally concurred with staffthat density remains an issue of concern. He indicated the direction for Option 1 (343 lots) was to meet the development standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, and Option 2 (390 lots) had a long way to go in depicting exemplary, innovative, or special design amenities, and that these elements have to be shown at a minimum before optional design standards would be viewed _ favorably by the Planning Commission. PC Adjourned Minutes -2- May 13, 1998 B. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 98-04 - GREG ROBERTS - A request to construct a 4,899 square foot Texaco service station, including fast food service, on 1.73 acres of land in the Community Commercial Distdct (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 1100-061-02. Brad Duller, City Planner, explained the purpose and goals of the Pre-Application Review process. Gil Ficke, Texaco Representative, presented Texaco's intent to construct a service station with fast food (Green Burrito, Cad's Junior, Baskin Robbins) on the site. He indicated that unlike other service station companies, Texaco chooses to be sensitive to the design requirements of the City and is open to suggestions. Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, outlined items that would need to be revised to meet applicable development standards. He indicated that staff's primary concerns relate to the proposal for a temporary driveway on Foothill Boulevard given General Plan and Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan access control policies limiting driveways on Foothill, the potential for unsafe traffic movements given closeness of the driveway to the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue, and the undefined nature of just how temporarily the driveway would exist. He also pointed out that the proposal calls for a drive-thru lane with a 25 foot setback from Etiwanda Avenue, while Planning Commission Drive-Thru Design Policy requires a 45 foot setback. He indicated that provision of heavily landscaped berms and architectural trellis features could adequately mitigate the presence of the drive-thru lane with as little as a 25 foot setback. He concluded with a suggestion that the design include elements akin to the Etiwanda area given the site's gateway function relative to Etiwanda. He thought this could be accomplished through creative use of fieldstone veneer, multi- pane windows, decorative paving, and creative canopy design. Mr. Bullet reviewed the mechanics of master planning ultimate access through the parcel(s) to the east. He asked that the applicant clarify the design intent of the canopy over the diesel pumps. Mr. Ficke said that Texaco intends to serve small trucks, up to the size of bobtail trucks. Commissioner McNiel asked how many diesel pump stations are proposed and about whether or not big-rigs would use the pumps. Mr. Ficke responded that seven stations are proposed. He indicated that the distance between the pumps could accommodate big-rig sized trucks. Commissioner Macias indicated that the design of the berms and landscaping would have to be done properly to screen the drive-thru lane. He was very concerned about big-rig trucks using the diesel pumps and about the potential for on-site conflicts between trucks and cars. He was concerned that 150 fee~ of separation between the driveway and the intersection would not be sufficient to be safe. He agreed that the architectural design should incorporate features from Etiwanda. Mr. Duller asked the Commissioners to be very clear whether or not they are in favor of semi-truck use of the site. Commissioner Tolstoy indicated that he was not necessarily concerned with dual use of the operation by trucks and cars but is concerned about how the circulation movements are controlled. From what he could see, he did not feel the proposed site plan adequately provides for truck/car circulation and the avoidance of conflict. He stated that use of berms to screen the drive-thru lane is crucial, that cars in the drive-thru lane should not be visible at all from the streets. He was concerned whether the parking provided would adequately serve the fast food operations. He was concerned about the ultimate off site driveway; how the City would require it and be assured of its implementation. He didn't care for the design of the wall signs and felt that architectural design should be left up to the Design Review Committee. PC Adjourned Minutes -3- May 13, 1998 Commissioner McNiel was very concerned about the level of large truck activity that would be using the diesel pumps. He liked the idea of using berms to screen the drive-thru lane but cautioned the applicant to be aware of the difference in elevation between the site and Foothill Boulevard. He stressed the entry statement is critical, that the architectural design should relate more to the Etiwanda community though he was not sure how this would be accomplished. He was not as concerned with the temporary ddveway on Foothill Boulevard since it would be in an area where cars are slowing down rather than accelerating. He wanted some form of guarantee that the temporary driveway would ultimately be replaced with a driveway located further east. Commissioner Bethel indicated that he would want to see a significant upgrade to the landscaping because he felt what was shown on the site plan is quite sparse. He was concerned about potential conflicts between trucks and cars and said he would prefer that trucks not use the station. He felt that the driveway is proposed to be too close to the intersection and that there would likely be a stacking problem on Foothill Boulevard. He thought the architecture is too boxy, that it should incorporate more features from Etiwanda. He also suggested the use of multi-pane windows. Chairman Barker indicated that he takes issue with activity centers, that the buildings are allowed to be far too close to the street. Putting that concern aside, he said that the proposed design does not appear to provide a quality activity center and that the building should be designed to draw people into the Etiwanda community. He stressed that if river rock is used, it must be natural, real dyer rock instead of manufactured. He stated that cars in the drive-thru lane sl~ould be completely screened from view. He was concerned about the viability of master planning access with the parcel(s) to the east given separate ownership. He agreed with all comments made by other Commissioners and cautioned the applicant to design the building to be crime resistant. He concluded by stating that he is not opposed to development of the site with a service station so long as it is done right. Mr. BuIler summarized the Commissioner's concerns and comments. He said the service station use is acceptable; the interim driveway on Foothill Boulevard is workable; there is a significant concern about incorporating a diesel service that will encourage or allow fueling of large trucks; special attention needs to be paid to master planning ultimate access through the parcels to the east; the site functions as a gateway to Etiwanda and is in a unique location, a unique activity center; the drive-thru lane should not be visible from the streets; and architecture should incorporate more elements from Etiwanda. He indicated that no canopy design was provided but that staff would work with the applicant on the design of one. He told the Commissioners that the development of the parcels to the east would be conditioned to comply with the access master plan developed by the applicant. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT. The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes -4- May 13, 1998