HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992/03/19 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
March 19, 1992
Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission to order at 8:35 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains
Room at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS:
PRESENT:
Larry McNiel, John Melcher, Peter Tolstoy,
Wendy Vallette
ABSENT:
Suzanne Chitiea
STAFF PRESENT:
Nanette Bhaumik, Assistant Landscape Designer; Brad
Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner;
Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner; Steve Hayes, Associate
Planner; Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner; Betty Miller,
Associate Civil Engineer; Scott Murphy, Associate
Planner; Beverly Nissen, Associate Planner.
OWNER/DEVELOPER PRESENT:
Don Thompson, Jary Cockroft, George Chu,
Ernie Parilla; Lewis Homes
, , , ,
PRE- APPLICATION REVIEW 92-01 (DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13753~ - LEWIS HOMES -
Review of conceptual site planning and housing product within a recorded
subdivision within the Victoria Planned Community.
Brad Bullet, City Planner, opened the workshop by explaining the purpose of
the new pre-application review process ~nd the history of its formation. He
then outlined the presentation procedures for the applicant and Commission.
Don Thompson,. Lewis Homes, stressed the importance of expediting the
processing of this project if Lewis purchases the recorded tract from the
bank. He asked the Commissioners to consider waiving design review of the
housing type previously constructed in Lewis' Rosecrest project in order to
concentrate on the unit plotting and the one-story unit design at the future
Design Review Committee meetings. He felt the depth of these recorded lots
and the introduction of the one-story plan will help in giving this project a
more open feeling than that created in Rosecrest.
Jary Cockroft, Lewis Homes, stated that the Rosecrest product is selling
relatively well in the current economy. He indicated that one of the two-
story house designs used in Rosecrest was eliminated for the project and
replaced with a one-story model, per staff's direction.
Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, presented an overview of the proposal and
highlighted potential issues/discussion topics for Commission consideration.
Chairman McNiel felt that the unit mix along the south side of Candela Drive
should be modified to produce a more open streetscape appearance and
additional side yard setbacks should be provided to allow for recreational
vehicle storage access to side and rear yards. He liked the introduction of
the single story plan but did not feel circumventing the design review process
relative to its review was appropriate.
Commissioner Tolstoy expressed his concern for the minimal side yard setbacks
between units. He felt that the entire project should be closely scrutinized
at Design Review as ideas about development mature. He also indicated that
single story units should be plotted on the corner lots closest to the two
vehicular entrances to the project.
Commissioner Melcher shared similar concerns as the other Commissioners
relative to the plotting of the one-story plan. He felt that the lower
profiles of the one-story plan will reduce the crowded streetscape appearance
and side yard tunnels created by minimal separations between adjacent two-
story units. He agreed that the one-story plan should be reviewed by the
Design Review Committee. He commended the applicant on the houses built in
their Rosecrest tract and the high percentage of one-story models proposed
within the new project.
Commissioner Vallette agreed that the one-story plan should be reviewed by the
Design Review Committee. She felt that all lots should be plotted to comply
with the current side yard setback requirements (5 feet one side, 10 feet
other side), additional front yard setback variation should be provided given
the extra leeway with the deeper lots, the side yard setbacks for units
adjacent to the railroad should be increased, and the footprint of the one-
story plan should be narrowed to allow for larger side yard setbacks.
Mr. Buller observed that the housing product could technically fit on the lots
and meet the required minimum setbacks; hence, the side yard separation issue
is only one of design.
Commissioner Melcher suggested that the architect clip roof lines on some two-
story homes with small hips to alleviate the concern of continuous roof lines.
Commissioner Vallette asked staff for clarification about the required minimum
side yard setbacks.
Mr. Hayes stated that the tract was approved with a product prototype with
5-foot minimum side yard setbacks on both sides, hence this tract was
"grandfathered" with that criteria.
Commissioner Tolstoy stressed the importance of getting the best product
possible from both a site planning and architectural perspective.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- March 19, 1992
Mr. Buller summarized the Commission's concerns. He etated that a majority of
the Commissioners expressed concern with the unit plotting~ especially in
areas where lot widths do not allow for additional side separations with the
proposed units. He noted this issue may be resolvable without adjusting lot
lines or modifying the unit type~ but he reminded the Commission that if the
project moves forward, the changes in side yard setbacks and building
separations will not significantly change from what was presented for this
review. He acknowledged that a majority of the Commissioners favor the
introduction of the single story plan, provided it is plotted on more lots and
those lots leading into the project. In addition, he stressed the
Commissioners' desire for additional front yard setback variation and
direction to possibly "clip" roof lines on some two-story models (if room
volumes make this possible) to improve the streetscape appearance within the
project. Finally, Mr. Bullet concluded that the Commission will place
emphasis on the referenced site planning issues and the architecture of the
one-story plan at the Design Review Committee Meeting.
, , , , ,
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting concluded at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 19, 1992