No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992/05/27 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting May 27, 1992 Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 8:15 p.m. The meeting was held in the De Anza Room at the 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; Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Betty Miller, Associate Engineer; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner , , , , ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14475 - SAHAMA INVESTMENTS - A residential subdivision and design review for 71 single family residences on 113 acres of land in the Hillside Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) and Open Space Districts, located north of Almond Avenue, west of Sapphire Street - APN: 200-051-07, 55, 56, and 57. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented staff comments on the alternative site plans contained within the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the plan submitted by the applicant. Steve Morton, planning consultant for Sahama Investments, presented the applicant's response to the designs contained in the EIR. Mr. Morton also compared the project to the "Deer Creek" project located east of Milliken and noted that Deer Creek slopes roughly 8 percent whereas the project site slopes 15-18 percent. Prakash Sakrahney, Sahama Investments, indicated that the Deer Creek approach to grading would not be available and still meet the requirements for equestrian trails at the rear of each lot. Commission Vallette still had concerns about the number of units proposed in the northeast corner of the site, which is the steeper area of the site being developed. She thought there were too many driveways proposed, thereby creating an unattractive streetscape and the layout of units was not sensitive to the hillside nature of the location. Also, she felt a buffer/transition needs to be provided between the residences and the National Forest. She commented that having the northwest corner under private ownership may result in pools, tennis courts, and other amenities being installed by homeowners, thereby destroying the open space. She remarked that the same comments had been directed to the applicant at a previous Design Review Committee meeting. Mr. Morton noted the revisions that had occurred to the project to address the hillside concerns. He said greater steps had been incorporated into the units to take up the grade of the site and different orientations of the units have been provided to take advantage of views to the valley and to the mountains. He suggested deed restrictions could be placed on the lots to ensure preservation of the open space within private property. Mr. Sakrahney commented that the alternatives in the EIR do not work. He said the revisions necessary to the EIR alternatives to provide secondary access would result in 12-foot manufactured slopes and only 18 acres of additional open space over the proposed site plan. Marlene Trunnell, 10112 Bel Air, Montclair, stated that a gnatcatcher, a sensitive species, had been sighted on the property the previous Saturday. Cynthia Allaire, 1246 West 7th Street, Pomona, stated that with all the comments received on the EIR, it appears that this area is not a safe place to live. Richard Arklin, P.O. Box 566, Whittier, expressed concern about the development. He felt that the only acceptable alternative was the "No Project" alternative. He said the area already has smog and school over-crowdin~ problems and this project would add to these. He reported he had conducted a survey at Tetra Vista Village and it indicated that 90 percent of the people surveyed thought there was too much development occurring in Rancho Cucamonga. Mr. Arklin went on to say that every canyon is sacred and animals have equal rights to the use of these areas. He read from an article in the Wall Street Journal about the number of endangered species now listed and the increase in the listings over the years. Commissioner Chitiea stated that this was a very pristine area and that, with the number of vacant houses in the City, there did not appear to be a demand for housing, especially the more expensive units. Additionally, she commented that lot sales have not been very successful. As a result, she saw no reason to "cut up" the pristine areas with houses. With the number of environmental issues that had been raised with this project, she felt that none of the alternatives contained in the EIR or those presented by the applicant were acceptable. She thought the City should set an example for the County in development of the foothill areas and she did not feel the proposal did that. Commissioner Melcher noted that, based on the slope diagram, development of the west mesa could possibly work. He noted that the slopes at the northeast corner of the site are much steeper and he felt development should not occur within that area. He suggested one solution might be to stop development 600 feet north of the connection to the lower mesa. Also, he thought 4- to 5-acre lots might be used within the upper mesa. P C Adjourned Minutes -2- May 27, 1992 Commissioner Tolstoy felt that there were many problems connected with development on steep slopes. He agreed with Commissioner Chitlea's con~nents about the project. Commissioner Vallette commented that the City's consultant should explore an alternative utilizing all the criteria and comments submitted regarding the EIR (i.e., access, street grades, etc.). She thought the project needs to be more sensitive to the environment including, but not limited to, transition of density to the forest, provision of more open space, elimination/reduction of fragmented open space, and the use of native plant species during the landscaping of the project. She suggested one method of achieving these goals would be through a reduction in the number of units. Chairman McNiel felt that the site is a buildable parcel. He suggested that Commissioner Melcher's comments on site development may provide the best solution for what the land will allow to occur. He stated that the EIR adequately addressed the issue of habitat and the relationship to animal species and that the Commission should follow those recommendations. Commissioner Vallette asked Chairman McNiel if this development was appealing in the hillside area. Chairman McNiel responded that development can occur. He felt the project was acceptable as presented by the applicant. Commissioner Tolstoy expressed concern about the exposure of residents to issues of p~blic safety (i.e., earthquakes, fire, etc.). Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the EIR is not designed to address every possible scenario. He said the EIR establishes the ground work for development by identifying areas of concern and indicating how these impacts might be lessened or eliminated. Chairman McNiel stated that the Commission appeared to have differing opinions on whether or not development should occur in this area and to what extent. He suggested that the Commission may wish to consider development with a limited number of units in the northeast corner of the site. Commissioner Melcher proposed that development occur on the lower mesa and that limited development be allowed on the upper mesa. Mr. Morton suggested that 1/2-acre lots could be provided on the lower mesa and larger lots on the upper mesa. Mr. Bullet suggested that the west mesa be maintained as presented by the applicant but progressively larger lots should be provided on the east mesa. Also, from the discussion of the Commissioners, he thought the number of units should be reduced to address the environmental concerns. He indicated that because of the time constraints on the project, staff would work with the applicant on these issues for formal presentation to the Commission on July 8, 1992. P C Adjourned Minutes -3- May 27, 1992 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was recessed to the regular meeting at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Bullet Secretary P C Adjourned Minutes -4- May 27, 1992