Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005/06/22 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting June 22, 2005 Vice Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 9:50 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Larry McNiel, Cristine McPhail, Pam Stewart ABSENT: Rich Macias STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Larry Henderson, Principal Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer. NEW BUSINESS A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-01270 - LEWIS INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC - A request to develop 142 single family detached homes in a gated community on 20 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side Center Avenue, between Arrow Route and 26th Street - APN: 0209-092-04. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17382 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-01280. Mr. Mark Thomas,William Lyons Homes, introduced the Development team members;John Young and Staci Lin of Lewis Operation Companies, Denise Ashton, Planner and Architect for WM. Hezmalhalch, and Rich Krumwiede,Architerra Design Group. Mr.Thomas gave an overview of the Project and Ms. Ashton followed up with a detailed description on the evolution of the site design. Brad Buller, gave a brief presentation on the issues staff would like to get feedback on which included: Master Plan (Office—Residential Interface and Physical relationship), Mixed Residential Concept, ascending density as a transition and buffer, internal circulation and open space relationship. Commissioner McNiel expressed a concern with visitor parking needs being above and beyond the street parking being proposed. He asked to see a thorough parking analysis. Commissioner Fletcher questioned the adequacy of a bermed landscape buffer as an adequate transition between land uses. Mark Thomas indicated they are only proposing 15 feet on the residential side and 20 feet with future office development. Commissioner Fletcher was more concerned what the office users would be looking at than the residential portion of the project, and that if the transition was adequately addressed it would have negative consequences on the office area and he preferred the office area be built first. Commissioner Stewart agreed with Commissioner Fletcher and indicated the project residential component appeared too dense and the focus should be more on the office design. She commented that the residential section has a row house appearance, which is not very attractive. She said the design lacks a centerpiece, but appears to be heading in the right direction if the buffer/interface is addressed and the appearance of overbuilding the site is handled. Commissioner McPhail indicated a mixed-use transition is a good concept,but she shared the other Commissioner's concerns with visitor parking, density, and the more generous use of open space. She also requested more details on the side yards and the use of a courtyard design through the use of decorative pavement edging, landscaping, and walls. Brad Buller, City Planner asked the Commission to comment whether the use of 2 housing products in the same housing development would be considered innovative for the purpose of using the City Development Code Optional Standards. Commissioner McNiel, with the concurrence of Commissioner McPhail, indicated that the use of 2 residential product types does not by itself meet the intent of the innovative product type design and that creating for design excitement and a more sufficient buffer other than a tree strip is needed. They also agreed the site is being over built. All the Commissioners concurred that the project was not meeting the intent of the innovative product provisions, and that integration of the office and residential products into a seamless environment would be the desired means to achieve an innovative product. Mr. Buller suggested the Commission agree to hold another workshop if the applicant wanted to present further design concepts. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjoumed at 10:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ,ice Bra:Wer V Secretary Approved: June 27, 2005 PC Adjourned Minutes -2- June 22, 2005