Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005/10/12 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting October 12, 2005 Chairman Stewart called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chambers at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Stewart then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL a' COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Cristine McPhail, Pam Stewart ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Acting City Planner; Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney; Vance Pomeroy, Contract Planner; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Joe Stofa, Associate Engineer; Barbara Tuncay, Planning Department Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS Dan Coleman,Acting City Planner, gave a brief description of the planning process for the benefit of the students visiting from Alta Loma High School and Los Osos High School. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Macias, seconded by McPhail, carried 4-0-1 (McNiel absent), to approve the minutes of September 28, 2005. Commissioner McNiel arrived at 7:05 p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR A. HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2005-00343—THOMAS HUNSUCKER—A request to build a 5,705 square foot house on .48 acre of vacant land, located approximately 182 feet east of the intersection between Laredo Place and Reales Street—APN: 1061-801-25. Motion: Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Macias, to adopt the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McNIEL, McPHAIL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE -carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS B. DISCUSSION OF INFILL DEVELOPMENT— ORAL REPORT C. DISCUSSION OF COMMERCIAL REMODELS — ORAL REPORT Dan Coleman,Acting City Planner, gave a Power Point presentation highlighting infill development and commercial remodels. He noted that some of the projects depicted have raised concerns at the the City Council level. He commented that land use, design, and scale of the projects and how they interface with surrounding or adjacent development, along with transitions between projects and project buffering are major concerns. He noted the Aim All Storage project has met with neighborhood opposition because of the impacts on the adjacent neighborhood in terms of wall construction, views from the second floor of homes, a lack of landscape buffering, glare and heat produced by white roof tops and wall facades, noise emanating from metal rooftops during rain storms and the hours of operation, and a poor interface of existing walls from the housing with walls surrounding the storage area. Regarding commercial remodels, Mr. Coleman highlighted a massive, Mediterranean two-story home constructed on Etiwanda Avenue that is out of character with its conservative,single-story neighbors. He indicated the main issue with this infill project was a lack of design sensitivity to the neighborhood. He then reported in regard to commercial remodel projects and recent concerns raised with businesses that are by-passing Planning Staff and/or Commission review required for new exterior paint colors and the addition of awnings. He commented that some businesses are anxious to brighten up and/or draw attention to themselves in this way to attract business. He said Boston Market asked Lewis Development if they could re-paint and Lewis Development did not approve their paint choice;they subsequently re-painted in spite of the direction given. He noted that in the case of Boston Market, Lewis Development would be enforcing their CC&Rs to bring Boston Market into compliance. He commented that Code Enforcement has not yet been brought in to address the paint and awning issue at Spaghetti Eddies. He remarked that Spaghetti Eddies'owner also had met with the prior City Planner, Brad Buller,and that they were directed to go through the review process and they too ignored the direction given to them. Mr. Coleman asked the Commission for their thoughts. Commissioner McNiel asked if action is in the horizon for the violations. Mr. Coleman said none had been taken as yet. He said no complaints had been received regarding the colors chosen. He remarked that staff would be closely monitoring any other future projects in this regard. Chairman Stewart said she recalled that the land use change processed by the developers of Aim All Storage was one that staff was supporting;that commercial development was more desirable at that location than more housing. She recalled that there was no public opposition. Mr. Coleman reported that public concerns were voiced over a two year period, starting with the Development Code Amendment to allow public storage within a residential district and through the Conditional Use Permit hearings. He noted that the developer has agreed to take care of some of the homeowner's issues such as repainting the glaring white walls and rebuilding the block walls, but they are not willing to re-paint the metal rooftops. Chairman Stewart said that regarding painting and remodeling without going through the process, that these businesses should be taken to task and that the code and conditions of approval should be strongly enforced. She noted that since these examples are not what was approved for these specific developments and because others have seen what these businesses are doing and they also want to do it, it could cause an onslaught of problems. She added that it appears Lewis is dealing with Boston Market, but if not, we need to step in. Planning Commission Minutes -2- October 12, 2005 • Vice Chairman Macias agreed. Commissioner McNiel commented that the Red Hill area has also been impacted with homes that are not design sensitive to the rest of the neighborhood. He said the new homes are massive and huge compared to the older existing homes. PUBLIC COMMENTS No additional comment was made at this time. COMMISSION BUSINESS The Commission determined there would not be a quorum available for the regular meeting scheduled for November 23, 2005 and therefore the meeting would be canceled. Dan Coleman, Acting City Planner, commented that if there is critical business that requires a meeting, those items could be brought to the Commission at a special meeting on November 30, 2005 if necessary. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Macias,carried 5-0,to adjoum. The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:25 p.m. to a workshop to discuss Pre-application Review DRC2005-0020. The workshop adjourned at 8:20 p.m. and those minutes appear separately. Res ectfully sub itted, an Coleman Acting Secretary Approved: October 26, 2005 Planning Commission Minutes -3- October 12, 2005