Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/02/28 - Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting February 28, 1991 Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held at the Tolstoy residence, 9540 Hillside, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Suzanne Chitlea, Larry McNiel, John Melcher, Peter Tolstoy, Wendy Vallette ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer; Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Rick Gomez, Community Development Director; Larry Henderson, Principal Planner; Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner; Joe O'Neil, City Engineer; Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary , , , , , Brad Bullet, City Planner, gave opening remarks about the purpose of the meeting. A. WORK PROGRAM STATUS Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner, briefly outlined the work program for Fiscal Years 1991-1993. He also discussed Code Enforcement efforts. Chairman McNiel asked the status of the recreational vehicle issue. Mr. Kroutil replied that the Public Safety Commission had reviewed the existing ordinance and felt it to be satisfactory. He said the Planning Commission would be reviewing the issue in the near future. He indicated the recreational vehicle owners were not pressing for further action at this time because there has been a moratorium on enforcement of the ordinance until the issue is finally decided. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned property maintenance enforcement procedures. Mr. Kroutil discussed nuisance abatement procedures. He then discussed the current planning workload. He indicated that several large projects are very active and take up much time. He also discussed the new work program items which are being addressed, such as Multi-family Housing and Foothill Boulevard Missing Link. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, stated that the "Special Projects" category covered assignments from the Planning Commission or City Council. He reported staff had recently worked on a photo brochure of projects which will be issued shortly and will include photographs of Design Award winning projects. Commissioner Melcher asked how many staff member weeks are considered per employee. Mr. Coleman replied 42 weeks is used as the basis per staff member per year. Commissioner Melcher asked if there will be staff reductions in the next fiscal year. Mr. Bullet responded that contingency plans have been made in case the economy does not pick up. He indicated staff reductions would be the last of many options that will be considered. Commissioner Melcher questioned if the number of weeks assigned to the Design Awards program could be cut. Mr. Coleman replied that the number represented two years and was a conservative number. Chairman McNiel asked the status of the regional mall. Rick Gomez, Community Development Director, stated that the applicant has a deadline to submit conceptual plans in March, but it was felt the applicant may request a time extension. He reported that the site plan is currently being revised and the infrastructure should be started this year. Chairman McNiel suggested that the compact car parking study be pushed forward and such spaces be eliminated. Mr. Bullet stated that staff must provide a rational basis for elimination of the compact spaces. Commissioner Melcher asked if the Air Quality Management District was pushing to reduce the number of parking spaces to encourage car pooling. Mr. Bullet stated that most City Councils will probably not be reducing parking because it does not appear such an action would be politically practical. He thought there would probably be no change in policy until public transportation becomes more available. It was the consensus of the Planning Con~nission that the Compact Car Parking Study should be moved up in priorities. Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, discussed the advance planning work program and reported that many items are mandated by state requirements or requests from other agencies. Planning Commission Minutes -2- February 28, 1991 Mr. Buller thought that the Multi-Family Housing Study would take a lot more time. ***** B. BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS FOR FISCAL YEARS 1991/92 AND 1992/93 Mr. Buller discussed the budget. He stated that the City Council and City Manager's office have indicated they wish to cut expenses in areas other than staffing and wcu!d like to avoid cutting personnel. Commissioner .... a~oy asked if any thought had been given to collecting more fees at the time an application is processed since many fees are now collected at the time of issuance of building permits, but many projects never advance to the building permit stage. Mr. Kroutil responded that a fee study was in process and the results will soon be forwarded to City Council. , , , , C. THE PLANNING PROCESS Mr. Bullet introduced a discussion on the Development/Design Review process. He reported that Chairman McNiel and Commissioner Melcher had met with Development Review Processing Subcommittee City Council Members Bouquet and Wright. Commissioner Melcher stated he felt that the City is extremely fortunate to have staff members who are extremely well qualified and ready, willing, and able to help. Chairman McNiel stated that staff has evolved and gotten better over the years. Commissioner Chitiea felt that staff does a good job of preparing applicants for coming into meetings. She said unfortunately some developers do not listen to staff and they run to City Council and act like they never heard the concerns that staff and the Commission have raised. Chairman McNiel felt the Design Review Committees should not try to massage bad projects, but should refuse them. Commissioner Vallette suggested the Planning Commission should perhaps do more public relations work. She felt the public would gain a better understanding of the Planning Commission if the Commissioners told their rationale behind decisions and the various areas of expertise of the Commission members. She felt the Planning Commission goal is to serve the public. She indicated her impression is that the community's perception is that the Planning Commission is cold and unresponsive to the community. She thought that the Commission could use their comments and questions to educate the public and any newspaper Planning Commission Minutes -3- February 28, 1991 reporters present at the meetings. She felt that when developers complain that the Planning Commission is too tough, the Commission is merely reflecting the standards of the City Council and the community at large. Mr. Kroutil suggested that verbal staff reports could be more detailed in order to benefit the audience. Mr. Buller commented that there is a perception in the business community that the Commission is tough. He agreed that public relations can be very important and said that there are some people promoting Rancho Cucamonga as a great city. He felt there is no debate about the final product. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned what type of advertising campaign could be conducted. Commissioner Melcher felt that staff is excellent in the area of public relations. He wished that the commissioners could attend the public relations training classes that City employees attend. Mr. Buller suggested that the Planning Commission Informational Guide might be expanded. He thought perhaps some presentations could be made at the beginning of Planning Commission meetings, similar to City Council proclamations. Commissioner Tolstoy suggested showing videos, such as "The City with a Plan" or a Design Review Committee meeting prior to Planning Con~nission meetings. Mr. Buller felt that videos could also be shown during breaks. Commissioner Chitlea suggested that the shelves outside the Council Chamber doors could be used to show off design award winners. Mr. Bullet thought it would be a good idea to secure testimonials from people who have gone through the process successfully and been happy with the process. Mr. Henderson reported that the Redevelop~ent Agency was getting ready to update their marketing video and suggested testimonials might be used in it. Mr. Buller stated that the Planning Commission has been criticized for the amount of time spent on details instead of larger planning issues. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that if the Commissioners did not focus on details, the City would not get quality development. Mr. Bullet responded that a comment had been made that details should be deferred to staff. Commissioner Chitlea suggested that details could be deferred back to the Design Review Committees. Planning Commission Minutes -4- February 28, 1991 Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that City Council members should perhaps attend some Design Review Committee meetings. Chairman McNiel suggested setting up a role playing scenario with City Council members. Commissioner Chitlea felt that the two Planning Commission workshops on the proposed Foothill Marketplace project submitted by Wattson were a good example of an unresponsive developer. She said the Commission made many suggestions regarding the site plan and architecture and the developer returned without addressing many of the issues and concerns voiced by the Commission. Mr. Buller suggested that an area that could be addressed further is the area of reaching consensus during Design Review or Planning Commission workshops. He said there had been some feedback that issues are sometimes individually raised and that it is difficult to judge whether there is Commission consensus on the issues raised. Mr. Kroutil also indicated that if the Commission gives a clear consensus on direction, staff can better work with the project proponents. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the Commission should advise a developer if something is unacceptable instead of trying to design the project for the architect. Commissioner Melcher agreed that the Commission should not have to tell architects how to design their projects. He felt items should not be scheduled for the Design Review Committee until staff could recommend approval unless the applicant wouldn't accept staff's direction and the Design Review Committee was being asked to support staff. He thought that Design Review should remain a lay process. He sensed a tendency to point to certain projects and styles because they have been successful, but he feared the Commission may be blocking all unconventional, new ideas. He felt the ability of the designer is important. Commissioner Tolstoy felt staff and the Commission should feel pride because they do not have the problems that are being experienced in other cities. , , , , , ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -5- February 28, 1991