Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993/12/14 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting December 14, 1993 Chairman Barker called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Barker then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, John Melcher, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Bullet, City Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Steve Hayes, Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Olen Jones, Senior Redevelopment Analyst; Jan Reynolds, Assistant Redevelopment Analyst; LeAnn Smothers, Redevelopment Analyst OWNER/DEVELOPER: Nacho Gracia and Mark Aguilar, North Town Mousing Development Corporation; Nora Brown, David Rosen & Associates; Bob Banman, Prairie Pacific Investments; Dan Guerra, Derbish Guerra Associates; Michael Pyatok, Pyatok Associates; Rafael Urena, Wolff, Lang, Christopher Architects. , , , , , PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 93-07 - PYATOK ASSOCIATES - Review of the conceptual site planning for an 8.7 acre site located south of the Rancho Cucamonga Middle School on the south side of Feron Boulevard and west of Old Town Park. Brad Bullet, City Planner, opened the workshop by explaining the purpose of the Pre-Application review process and the meeting format for this project. Olen Jones, Senior Redevelopment Analyst, provided an historical perspective of the site acquisition and previous development agreements associated with this site and the adjacent park property. Me stressed the goals of redeveloping the entire North Town area and the strides made in accomplishing these goals. He introduced the members of the development team and their association with the project. Mr. Bullet introduced the members of the Planning Commission and asked Mr. Jones to elaborate on the development agreement and State law regarding density bonuses and how the proposed density relates to these documents. Mr. Jones elaborated on the specifics of the development agreement regarding the density bonus and explained how State laws affect the proposal. Mike Pyatok, Pyatok Associates Architects, summarized the issues discussed during the neighborhood workshops that occurred with the residents of North Town. He presented slides of the meeting and described the design kits used in the workshops. He noted that each lot included 88 units, 150 trees, 226 parking spaces, and drive aisles. He explained how the residents' comments and concerns, which included safety and proximity of vehicular parking areas to living quarters, the need for an ample amount of private open space, the request for a more single family look to the architectural design, the safety of children, and the overall security for residents within the project, were incorporated into the proposed site plan. He explained the purpose behind and placement of the community center and child care facility and stressed how the "grid" pattern fit in with the fabric of the existing neighborhood, only on a smaller scale. He concluded by stating his goal is to resolve the site planning issues raised by staff at this time and that architectural schemes would soon follow. Chairman Barker asked the applicant if the requirements for visitor parking were being met on the proposed plan. Mr. Pyatok confirmed that 22 spaces, or one per every four units, was being provided. Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, presented a brief summary of etaff's major concerns and asked for input from the Commission relative to these issues as well as any other major items the Commission wished to raise. Mr. Bullet pointed out that it has been the Commission's position in the past to require that all projects meet or exceed all City standards. Commissioner Melcher questioned the amount of Council involvement up to this point. Mr. Jones explained that the Council has had only limited input on the project so far. He stated however, that the Council has stressed that no compromises should be made to City development standards and that the goal of having a quality affordable housing project is of extreme importance. Chairman Barker asked if the North Town residents were given an option of using less than the 88 units in the kits at the workshops. Mr. Pyatok responded that this was briefly mentioned but it never really became an issue with the participants at the workshops. Commissioner Melcher inquired if 88 units were necessary to make the project financially feasible. Ms. Nora Brown, David Rosen & Associates, responded that a loss in the number of units could drive up the cost per bedroom ratio, which could potentially Planning Co~nission Minutes -2- December 14, 1993 inhibit the developer from receiving the affordable housing tax credit incentives for this project. LeAnn Smothers, Redevelop~ent Analyst, added that the City's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) stressed the importance of allowing for as much affordable housing as necessary within the City's redeveloA~nent area. Commissioner Lumpp asked staff how the addition of these 88 units affects the overall CHAS projections. Mr. Jones stated that this project is the only current project of its magnitude. He said several single family lots had been purchased in the past by the Redevelopment Agency for the purpose of providing affordable housing but recent Council direction and economic strategy has been to sell those lots. Commissioner McNiel asked how many affordable units were provided in the Grove Avenue project. Mr. Jones indicated that over 80 units were deemed affordable within that project. Commissioner Lumpp questioned the number of affordable units that should be provided in the redeveloE~nent area. Mr. Jones responded that the goal is to deem 20 percent of the available housing stock in the redevelop~ent area as affordable. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if any other significant affordable housing sites were being considered by the City at this time. Mr. Jones noted that the City had purchased the Ellena Winery site, which is zoned for high density residential develo[Mnent, but the focus of the agency at this time was to look at the possibilities of deeming some of the existing housing stock affordable. Commissioner Lumpp inquired as to how the density bonus prescribed by State law applies to this project. Mr. Jones stated that a 25 percent density bonus is permitted for projects that devote a minimum of 20 percent of the units to meeting the affordable unit provisions. Bob Banman, Prairie Pacific Investments, talked about how management of the facility would occur, including the control of inoperable cars. Con~nissioner Melcher asked the neighborhood representatives' opinion of the significance of the parking deficit. Nacho Gracia, North Town Housing Develo[Mnent Corporation, stated that he felt the proposed on-site parking is insufficient. Planning Commission Minutes -3- December 14, 1993 Commissioner McNiel felt that parking will be a problem as currently proposed. He felt comfortable with the proposed product type, density, grid site plan design, and use of common open space areas. He concurred with the developers that residents will take advantage of the park for large outdoor group events and felt that two-story units next to the park would provide a greater sense of security. Con~nissioner Melcher questioned the value of the small common open space areas but felt they were designed appropriately and with good purpose. He stated that the land use transition and site plan layout issues were handled appropriately by the architect. He agreed that the parking impacts could become a problem but generally supported the project as proposed. Commissioner Tolstoy liked the idea of the neighborhood meeting with the design kits as a method to gain knowledge of the potential issues of the surrounding neighborhood. He felt the site was in a perfect location for the type of housing and density proposed, near a park and school. He indicated that the day care and Community Center were in an appropriate location, but felt the parking situation, both near these facilities and on the site as a whole, should be addressed. He added that the management will not be able to control the parking situation. He liked the linear common open space concept and agreed that major outdoor activities could best take advantage of the adjacent park. He found the grid layout acceptable, as it blends in well with the surrounding neighborhood. Commissioner Lumpp concurred that the level of community involvement to this point was an excellent idea. He found the density acceptable, but thought the parking situation needs to be addressed. He stated that the proposed tandem parking actually creates a loss of two parking spaces typically available within a driveway. He felt that since this is not a senior project, more parking needs to be made available. He thought the open space and overall site plan were designed appropriately, based on input from the neighborhood. He felt the land use transition between this use and the existing single family homes and the park was appropriate~ and the two-story homes next to the park gave a sense of security. Chairman Barker agreed that it made good sense to have the community involved in the early stages. He indicated that the overall parking situation was a disaster waiting to happen and that the parking and access adjacent to the day care facility and Community Center should be addressed. He noted that special attention should be given to the design of the perimeter barrier adjacent to the park so it does not become laden with graffiti. He felt that security gates should be incorporated into the design at all vehicular and pedestrian access points. In addition, he noted that the enlargement of the linear common landscape areas presented in the package were optimistic and would likely become a maintenance burden. Commissioner McNiel asked staff for clarification on the parking issue and what would actually need a variance as currently proposed. Planning Commission Minutes -4- December 14, 1993 Mr. Hayes stated that a variance would be needed for the number of covered garage parking spaces and total number of parking spaces as currently proposed. However, he noted that it was feasible to provide the required number of spaces on the property, thus limiting a variance requirement to only the number of covered stalls. Commissioner Tolstoy stressed the need to select building materials that do not require a tremendous amount of maintenance. Commissioner Lumpp concurred, but stated that the attractiveness of these materials is also critical. Mr. Buller summarized the concerns and comments of the Commission by stating the most critical issue for the development team to resolve is the parking situation. He stated that the majority of Commission members felt that the proposed site plan adequately addresses issues such as land use transition, site plan design, open space, and density. He asked the Commission whether or not they would like to review the formal application as a workshop or through the regular Design Review Committee. The Commission felt a Planning Commission workshop would be preferable. Mr. Pyatok asked the Commission about the possibility of preparing a parking study to justify the proposed number of parking spaces within the project. Chairman Barker said it was inappropriate to negotiate but that the Commission was willing to look at any information provided so long as all of the variables associated with the Southern California environment and automotive life-style are used. , , , , , ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, December 21, 1993, in lieu of the regularly scheduled meeting on December 22, 1993. Respectfully submitted, Brad Bullet Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -5- December 14, 1993