Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993/12/08 - Agenda Packet - Adjourned1977 CITY OF RANCHO C UCAMONC~ PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 8, 1993 8:00 P.M. TRACT 13316 WORKSHOP RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA I. Roll C&11 Commissioner Barker Commissioner Lumpp Commissioner McNiel II. Old Business Commissioner Melcher Commissioner Tolstoy III· IV. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13316 - L.D. KING, INC. - A review of the alternative grading schemes for compliance with the Hillside Development Ordinance for a recorded tract map consisting of 123 lots in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, north of Carrari Street. New Business Public comments This is the time and place for the general public to address the Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. V. Adjournment DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT December 8, 1993 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13316 - L.D. KING, INC. - A review of the alternative grading schemes for compliance with the Hillside Development Ordinance for a recorded tract map consisting of 123 lots in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, north of Carrari Street. ABSTRACT: The purpose of this workshop is to review the applicant's grading plan that was prepared at the direction of the Planning Commission, and determine the final grading scheme to be applied to this tract;. The issue is the inherent conflicts between the Hillside Development Ordinance and the Equestrian Policy of requiring corral and trail access. BACKGROUND: On August 11, 1993, the Commission conducted a workshop to review three alternative grading schemes. Scheme 1 proposed to create large flat pads with 2 to 1 slopes while Schemes 2 and 3 proposed to grade the lots with stepped pads, (6-foot in Scheme 2 and 9-foot in Scheme 3, and flattened rear yard slopes to bring the finished grade closer to the natural contours. The Commission also discussed the conflict between the Hillside Development Ordinance and the Equestrian Policy that requires a 24 by 24-foot corral area and an access from the corral area to the trail. The Commission directed the applicant to prepare a grading plan and determine the number of lots that can accommodate corrals within the tract. Staff has included in this report copies of the Equestrian Policy (Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-226), Planning Commission minutes and staff's report of August 11, 1993. ANALYSIS: Because there are two new members on the Commission, staff has included in this report a brief discussion on the Hillside Standards and the Equestrian Policy, a description and analysis of the previous three grading schemes as well as the new grading scheme with the corrals. Plans for the above-mentioned grading schemes are attached to the report for comparison. ITSM A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 13316 - L.D. KING, INC. December 8, 1993 Page 2 ae Hillside Development Standards versus Equestrian Policy of providing corrals and trail access: Hillside Standards and the Equestrian Policy are established to implement the General Plan. The intent of the Hillside Standards is to minimize grading and encourage sensitive development by using special hillside architectural and design techniques such as stepped pads, stem walls, etc. The intent of the Equestrian Policy is to further the use of trails by homeowners. This policy requires a 24 by 24-foot corral area and a 10-foot wide access to the trail with a maximum gradient of 5 to 1 to be shown on each lot of a tract. These requirements will result in more grading which conflicts with the Hillside Development Ordinance. B. Alternative Grading Schemes: 1. Scheme 1 - Create a large flat pad for the house with a 2 to 1 slope in the rear yard. This concept is contrary to the Hillside Development Ordinance. This concept is favored by the applicant because the lots can be mass graded and marketed to builders for their standard house plans. 2e Scheme 2 - Provide a 6-foot stepped pad for the house and gentler slopes in the rear yard. This concept is one step towards the Hillside Ordinance, but still requires substantial grading of each lot to create the house pads. Scheme 3 - Provide a 9-foot stepped pad for the house and gentler slopes in the rear yard. Staff preferred this concept because the stepped pads allow a large portion of the rear yard to have minimal grading, which is closer to meeting the intent of the Hillside Ordinance. Scheme 4 - Provide a corral and trail access for majority of the lots. This scheme was prepared to address the Co~m%ission's direction at the August 11, 1993 workshop. The concept is similar to Scheme 1. It requires substantial grading to create a 24 by 24-foot flat area for the corral in addition to the house pads. This concept will also create large 2 to 1 slopes. The applicant has indicated that approximately 79 lots of the total 123 lots can be graded to meet the Equestrian Policy. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 13316 - L.D. KING, INC. December 8, 1993 Page 3 In sununary, staff believes that Grading Scheme 4, prepared by the applicant, met the directions of the Co~anission. However, staff's opinion is that a sensitive approach to the grading of the lots is more desirable. To meet the Equestrian Policy, the location of a corral can he shown conceptually on those lots that meet the 70-foot setback limitation but without showing the grading. This approach of using a sensitive grading scheme together with the showing of conceptual locations of corrals and access trails will result in less grading. At the same time it ensures that as many lots as possible are provided with the options to keep horses. The future homeowner who desires to keep horses can grade the rear yard for a corral or barn with an access to the trail. Through the grading or the building plan check process, staff would ensure the requirements of the Equestrian Policy are met. Leaving the future homeowner to do the grading for the corral is no different from him/her grading the rear yard for a swimming pool or tennis court. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the four schemes, determine which scheme is acceptable, and then direct the applicant to proceed by preparing appropriate plans for Design Review. Staff recommends Scheme 3 for the project with the provision that the applicant show conceptually the location of the corrals on those lots that can meet the setback requirements but not the grading for them. City ~anner BB:NF:mlg Attachments: Planning Co~ission Minutes and Staff Report dated August 11, 1993 Resolution No. 88-226 Grading Scheme 1 Grading Scheme 2 Grading Scheme 3 Grading Scheme 4 The Commission directed the applicant to forward revised designs to staff by August 18 in order to schedule a workshop following the regular Commission meeting of August 25, 1993. Be DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13316 - L. D. KING - The review of alternative grading schemes for compliance with the Hillside Development Ordinance for a recorded tract map consisting of 123 lots on 84 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, north of Carrari Street - APN: 210-071-14, 37, and 45. Brad Bullet, City Planner, gave a brief introduction to the project and stated the purpose of the workshop. Steve Ross, Assistant Planner, gave a presentation describing the location of the site and the project's background and its relationship to the Hillside Development Ordinance. He stated the purpose of the workshop was to determine to what extent the Commission expects the applicant to comply with the Hillside Development Ordinance. He said specifically the Commission's purpose was to review the proposed grading alternatives and give the applicant a direction to proceed with the application. Commissioner Tolstoy relat%d that a peach orchard had previously been located at the site. David Buxbaum, representing Chine Valley Bank, stated the project was acquired through foreclosure by the bank. He said the bank's goal is to develop the tract so that it can be sold to a builder. He indicated the bank will install the storm drain system, mass grade the site, a~d install the streets and related infrastructure. Carla Berard, representing L. D. King, described the alternative grading concepts that were before the Commission for review. Commissioner Vallette said she worried that the lots would be sold to individual buyers for the construction of custom homes. She felt there should be some architectural conformity. Mr. Buxbaum stated the bank had filed a letter with the City Engineer stated it did not intend to have the project built with custom homes, but wanted to sell the whole project to a developer. Mr. Bullet stated the bank could sell the project to a builder with the requirement that certain architectural criteria be met relating to a uniform design theme with sensitivity to the Hillside Ordinance. Commissioner Melcher added the bank could have an architect establish a design envelope for the prospective homes. He felt an architect would also be worth consulting regarding the amount of grade which could be accommodated in a house design. PC Adjourned Minutes -3- August 11, 1993 Commissioner Chitiea felt the equestrian uses must be accommodated wherever possible through the tract. She requested that 24 foot by 24 foot corral areas with access to the local feeder trails be provided wherever possible, even if additional grading is necessary, per Planning Commission Resolution No 88-226. Mr. Bullet suggested that the project could be graded more sensitively with grading concepts for future equestrian use provided to new homeowners, rather than grading all possible lots for equestrian uses. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed with commissioner Chitlea that the project should be graded with the intent to make as many lots as possible available for equestrian use. He acknowledged that some lots may not feasibly be used for equestrian use because of the amount of grading which would be necessary. He suggested the grading policy should be interpreted flexibly with regard to the project. He stated he was familiar with the site and observed that many of the property owners now in the area are no= the same as those who lived there when the project last had a public hearing. He suggested that the applicant conduct a neighborhood meeting with owners of the adjacent properties. He also recalled the Commission's concerns about the concrete channel which drains at the south end of the site. He said the channel is to be designed in a "naturalized" manner to reduce its visual impact. Commissioner Melcher suggested that the bank choose an architect with experience in designing sl~b-on-grade production housing as well as hillside developments. In conclusion, the Commission directed the applicant to provide horse corrals with access to local feeder trails consistent with Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-226 wherever possible. Compliance with the grading standards of the Hillside Development Ordinanc~ was deemed a secondary concern. In addition, the applicant was directed to develop some type of architectural guidelines for the development of homes by a future builder. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully mubmitted, Brad Bullet Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes -4- Auguat 11, 1993 PLANNING CO~9~ISSION WORKSHOP August 11, 1993 DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13316 - L.D. KING, Inc. - The review of alternative grading schemes for co~11ance with the Hillside Development Ordinance for a recorded tract map consisting of 123 lots on 84 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwellin9 uni~s per acre), located on the east si~e of Archibald Avenue, north of Carrari Street - APNt 210-071-14, 37, 45. ABSTRACT: The purpose of this workshop is to ~etermine the type of grading which should be permitted to occur on the site. Although the site has a recorded tract map, ~he Planning Co~aiseion has the power to determine how far the applicant must ~o to com~ly with the Hillside Development Ordinance. Staff's intent is not to bring the project into compliance with ordinance, but to determine the Co-~iesion's expected level of sensitivity to the ordinance. The Comiseion should review the alternative grading concepts to determine which, if any, would be the most appropriate for the %race. BACKGROUND: Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13316, a subdivision and Desi~ Review a~lication, was conditio~ally approved by the Planning Co~aission on March 27, 1987. The tra~ map was recorded on June 1, 1990, but neither grading nor building permi~ were issued. In addition, the design review approval for ~he ~omee has expired. The original developer, Frie~-n Ho~ee, encountered financial difficulty and the property has since reverted beck to the lender, Chine Valley Bank. On April 7, 1993 i.D. King, Inc., the planning and engineering firm for the bank, reeu~mitted a new Design Review application with the previously approved house plans. The purpose of the su~ittal wu to receive a new approval of the conceptual era&the plan in order to mass grade the site, cons~ru~ the re~re~ infrastructure, and then sell the lots to merchant buil~ers. Because the entire ~velopment concept of the tract is inconsistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, and the tract map is already recorded, sta£f ~,,.cided that the Planning Co-~%ssion should give s~me direction as to the tMpe of grading concept that would be preferred for the tract. STAFF CO~ENTS~ The Co-~lssi~ should review the three grading alternative~ provided for each of the conairlone ~picted in Sections A-A, B-B, and C-C. These conditions are typical of those found throughout the tract. proposed by the ap~licant. It basically propose~ creating larva flat pads with typically 2~1 slopes in ~e =ear y~.. ~ o~mr ~wo cross- sec~io~ on each 8hee~ represen~ al~e~a~ ~a~n~ concepts which would bring ~e Einiahed ~ade a~ 01o~e closer ~o ~e provLo~ ~=ural ~ado. ~eso two concep~ ~ne=a[ly u[i[izo 81opo~ ~ and fla=~ened PLANNING CO~4ISSI .~WORKSHOP DR FOR TRACT 1331~- L.D. KING, INC. August 11, 1993 Page 2 -- RECEIVEU -- CITY OF' RANCHO CUC AUG 1 1993 Mt I~M house with stem walls to step down with the grade. These two alternatives to the applicant's proposal show how the grading can be done to be more consistent with the intent of the Hillside Development Ordinance. Although these two proposals are preferred by staff, they also fall short of what the ordinance intends. Clearer, more detailed exhibits will be available at the workshop to aid in a discussion about the grading alternatives. Staff will also provide an additional grading alternative which would come closer to meeting the intent of the Hillside Development Ordinance. In addition, the entire development package for the project will be available for reference. RESOLUTION NO. 88-226 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COI~1ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA. CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING POLICIES REGARDING TRAIL ACCESS AND CORRAL SIZE. WHEREAS, the Planntng Cmmlssion ftnds tt necessary to establish certatn pollctes regarding access to local feeder tratls end corral stzes to Implement the General Plan's goals and objectives. NOI~, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planntng Cmmlsston of the Cfty of Rancho Cuc~mon~ does hereby resolve and declare thetr poltcy to be: 1. Zn the Equestrian Overlay District, all ne~ subdivisions sh&11 be designed to accommdat~ a itntmum 24' x Z4' corrll area. The development plans shell clearly delineate the area on each lot where antimls could be kept fn compliance wtth the setbac~ limitations of Pluntctpal Code Sectton 17.09.030 E.Z.(b). Z. Where local feeder tr&11s are required, access frm the corral a~ea to the. tratl shall be graded wttha ~txtmm slope gridtent of 5:1 and a mtntmm ~tdth of 10 feet. ' APPROVED AND ADOPTED THXS 26TH DAY OF ~TONER, 1988. PLANNING CONd/ZSSZON OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA · 8r~d Bullet, ~/Secret~ry of the Planntng Comtsston of the Ctty of Rancho Z, Cucamong&, do hereby certtt~ that, th~ foregoing R~solutton was duly and regularly Introduced, passed, and adopted by th~ Pl&nntng Comtsston of the Ctty of Rancho Cucamngl, it a regular mettng of the Pllnntng Coeantsslon held on the 26th day of October, 1988, by th~ following vot~-to-~tt: AYES: NOES: COI~1ISSIONERS: CC)I~IISSlONERS: BLAKESLEY, CH'[TXEA, EJ~ERZCK, I4CNIEL,TOLSTOY NONE ABSENT: CC)!JdISSIONERS: NONE