HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/04/11 - Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
April 11, 1991
Vice Chairman Chitiea called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 3:40 p.m. The meeting was held in
the Council Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center
Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS:
PRESENT:
Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel, John
Melcher, Peter Tolstoy, Wendy Vallette
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT:
Brad Buller, City Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner
MULTI-FAMILY STANDARDS STUDY - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The review and
discussion of various development standards and design guidelines for multi-
family projects.
Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the purpose of this meeting was to pick
up where we had left off from the last workshop on April 4, 1991.
Joe Olesen, Lewis Homes, submitted to Mr. Buller at the meeting a written
response to the April 4, 1991 Staff Report.
Chairman McNiel arrived at 3:50 p.m.
I. TRANSITION OF DENSITY AND BUFFERING
A. Development Code
There was no consensus from the Commission regarding the adequacy of the
current setback standards for multi-family projects when adjacent to single
family residents.
Representatives of Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Co. indicated that they
found the current standards adequate.
There was a concensus from the Commission to develop new standards requiring
two-story buildings to setback further than the current standards of 100 feet-
Both Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Co. stated that the current standards
are adequate.
Consensus from the Commission to require developers to articulate in writing
how they have designed their projects to meet the City's policies, guidelines,
and standards.
Both Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Co. agreed.
Commissioners McNiel, Tolstoy, and Vallette stated that they agreed with the
existing design policy as outlined in the staff report with one modification,
i.e., to change "can" to "shall."
Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Co. stated that the current language is fine.
B. Planned Community
There was no consensus from the Commission whether to amend the two Planned
Communities to add design guidelines and policies to be consistent with the
Development Code.
C. Etiwanda Specific Plan
Concensus from the Commission that current design policies are adequate. No
changes will be needed.
II. OPEN SPACE
A. Development Code
Concensus from the Commission that the percentage of open space is adequate.
Concensus from the Commission to develop new standards requiring a minimum
amount of recreational amenities.
Commissioner Melcher disagreed stating that the recreational amenities are
market driven.
Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Co. agreed that recreational amenities are
market driven and that the current codes are adequate.
B. Planned Community
Concensus from the Commission that the practice of applying the Development
Code standards of open space to the two Planned Communities is adequate.
III. SITE DESIGN
A. Streetscape
Concensus from the Commission that the current standards are adequate.
Planning Commission Minutes
-2- April 11, 1991
Concensus from the Commission that the setback standards for the two Planned
Communities should be increased to be as close to the Development Code as
possible.
B. Building Orientation
Concensus from the Commission that the proposed language as outlined in the
Staff Report is acceptable as a broad general statement.
Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Co. agreed.
C. Building Separation and Setback from Property Line
Concensus from the Commission to develop new standards and add to them into
the two Planned Communities.
Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Co. agreed.
D. Driveway/Circulation
The Commission disagreed with staff's recommendations.
Commissioner Vallette stated that the project should have an entry statement.
Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Co. agreed with the Commission.
E- Minimum Lot Area
Concensus from the Commission to develop new standards.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated that smaller lots should develop at the lower end
of the density range.
IV. ARCHITECTURE
Concensus from the Commission to add language as suggested in the Staff Report
to the Development Code as general design guidelines.
For items B, C, D, and E, Mr. Buller suggested that the Commission considered
them in the future.
The Commission agreed.
V. LANDSCAPING
The Commission was concerned with the quality of material and the maintenance.
Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that we establish standards for the tree
spread, i.e-, the height to the size of the trees-
Planning Commission Minutes
-3- April 11, 1991
Mr. Buller suggested that staff could look into strengthening the existing
policy to require the Landscape Architect to inspect the material and certify
them prior to releasing the project.
The Comntission agreed.
The Commission further agreed with staff's recommendations in developing new
standards for landscaped areas such as building to parking, building to
driveway, etc.
VI. PARKING
There was no concensus from the Commission whether the current parking
standards for multi-family projects are adequate.
Mr. Buller suggested that this subject be pushed for further study and
discussion.
The Commission agreed.
VII. PROJECT AMENITIES
There was not consensus from the Commission as to developing new standards
requiring RV parking spaces inmulti-family projects.
Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Co. stated that they disagreed with this
proposed requirement.
Concensus from the Commission to develop new standards for providing lockable
storage space.
Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Co- agreed.
Concensus from the Commission to develop new standards for requiring
washer/dryer and recycling facilities.
ADJOURNMENT
6:00 p.m. - Planning Commission adjourned to a workshop on May 25, 1991.
Respectfully submitted,
Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes
-4- April 11, 1991