HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004/02/25 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
February 25, 2004
Chairman Macias called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission to order at 7:25 p.m. The meeting was held at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center
Council Chambers, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Rich Macias, Cristine McPhail, Larry McNiel,
Pam Stewart
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Joe •Stofa,
Associate Engineer; Douglas Fenn, Associate Planner,
ANNOUNCEMENTS
No announcements were made at this time.
NEW BUSINESS
A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2003-01203 - ZAREMBA LAND DEVELOPMENT CO. -A
review of conceptual development plans for a mixed-use project consisting of 360 apartments,
20,000 square feet of retail, three restaurant pads, 15,000 square feet for a furniture store, and
4 acres of storage buildings,on 22.3 gross acres of land in the Industrial Park District(Subarea
12), located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Buffalo Avenue-APN: 0229-263-49 thru
53.
Brad Buller, City Planner, introduced the item and gave an overview of the Pre-Application Review
process. He emphasized that the purpose of the workshop was to look at the proposed project's
overall design and its relationship to the surrounding area.
Jerry Davis, managing partner of Tharldson Development, 1201 Page Drive, Fargo, North Dakota,
introduced his development team. He then reviewed the proposed mixed use of retail and
apartments as a unique urban in-fill village concept. He stated that this type of project has worked
well in other cities such as Irvine, and Mission Viejo in light industrial areas. He said that this project
would be an upscale project with a mix of homes next to jobs. He reviewed the many amenities that
the project would have for the tenants and people living in the apartments. He explained that the
development team has set aside 10 percent of the units as affordable housing units. He
acknowledged that staff is sensitive to the use in this area; but said their market research indicates
that this type of project can do well at the proposed site.
Douglas Fenn, Associate Planner, gave a brief overview of the site. He indicated that staff was
impressed with the project but that the issue is with the location. He reported staffs contention that
this is not the place for what the applicant intends to develop. He stated that staff reviewed a map
that indicates the location of the apartments would be over 2 miles away from grocery stores, parks,
and schools. He noted that the crux of staffs message is that the proposed project is in the wrong
location.
Commissioner Fletcher said that he had visited the site and agreed this is the wrong location for this
project.
Chairman Macias stated he has fundamental problems with the project and was astounded that the
• project concept is being proposed at this location. He indicated that the project would need a
General Plan Amendment and zone change that he would not support.
Commissioner McNiel thought that the project has merit but that it was too bad that the applicant
proposed this location. He felt that that the negatives outweigh any positives.
Commissioner Stewart agreed with her fellow Commissioners. She said she is not at all in favor of a
mixed use allowing residential in this area. She also had concern about the proposed furniture store
that could in the future be vacant and unsightly.
Commissioner McPhail thought that the project is fine for a downtown in-fill project, but in her
opinion, this is not the place for the project and she would not support the project at the proposed
location.
Mr. Buller summarized that the project has merit, but it is located at the wrong location.
Mr. Davis addressed the Commission and expressed that his company wanted to give the project a
chance at this location. He expressed appreciation for the Commissioners'feedback and said that
he and his company understood where staff and the Commissioners were coming from and they will
not pursue the matter any further.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No additional comments were made at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission adjoumed at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Br ore Iler W
Secretary
1
PC Adjoumed Minutes -2- February 25, 2004