HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992/01/16 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
January 16, 1992
Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission to order at 8:45 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:
Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel, John
Melcher, Peter Tolstoy, Wendy Vallette
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT:
Brad Buller, City Planner; Steve Hayes, Associate
Planner; Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner; Scott Murphy,
Associate Planner
, , , ,
UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS
- Review of the proposed uniform sign program for a ~60-acre commercial/retail
center located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between 1-15 and
Etiwanda Avenue - AFN: 229-031-03 through 13, 15, 16, 20, and a portion of
59.
Chairman McNiel opened the meeting for public comment.
David Holt, Signage Solutions, gave a brief overview of the sign program.
Chairman McNiel stated that he did not recall a sign program with the number
of directional signs proposed.
Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, noted that Terra Vista Town Center was
approved for three on-site directional signs with the latest revision to the
sign program.
Greg Wattson, Foothill Marketplace Partners, commented that the Fire District
has requested that directional signs, possibly with addresses, be provided at
the project entries.
Mr. Murphy remarked that the Fire District requires directional signs on
various types of projects to assist them in locating buildings, on-site fire
hydrants, knox boxes, etc. He suggested that staff check with the Fire
District to determine what specific requirements will be placed on this
project.
Commissioner Melcher felt that the overall design of the sign program was
disappointing. He thought the sign designs appear awkward with inconsistent
logo designs provided on the various monument signs. As proposed, he felt the
monument signs create the appearance of a cabinet with a border around the
tenant identifications and he thought the "picture frame" is not needed.
Commissioner Melcher also felt that the letters on the monument sign should be
three dimensional, extending out from the monument face.
Chairman McNiel felt that the monument signs should be scaled down. He
thought the number of monument signs proposed along Foothill Boulevard is
excessive and a considerable reduction in the number of signs should occur.
Commissioner Vallette agreed that too many signs are proposed for Foothill
Boulevard. She felt that wall signs on the back of the buildings along the
freeway would be acceptable.
Commissioner Chitlea commented that the number, size, and scale of the signs
within the Town Center is appropriate and that similar considerations should
be given for Foothill Marketplace. She concurred that the number of signs
proposed along Foothill Boulevard is excessive.
Commissioner Tolstoy remarked that logos tend to be cluttered and tough to
pick up as you drive by the site.
Mr. Wattson indicated that the center and tenants need to have recognition
from the street and freeway, but said h~ will work to keep it simple.
Commissioner Chitlea stated that Montclair Plaza has one large sign that is an
eyesore. She felt people know where Montclair Plaza is located without a sign
identifying every tenant. She noted the outlet stores in Lake Elsinore have
an architectural tower with signs on it that is also an eyesore. She thought
the pylon sign proposed for the site is not necessary. She hoped the regional
mall will have a sign that is low and tastefully done.
Commissioner Melcher noted that while the major tenants in Montclair Plaza'are
not identified on the pylon, they do have large wall signs that are readily
visible from the freeway. Additionally, he observed that the Montclair
Entertainment Center immediately to the west has a pylon sign that identifies
all the tenants of the complex. He felt the design of the proposed pylon sign
is terrible, but the marketing approach makes sense. He suggested the middle
tenant identifications on the pylon should be eliminated.
Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that all the tenant identifications under
"Major 2" be eliminated.
Chairman McNiel felt that the pylon sign is not necessary if wall signs are
provided on the back of the buildings.
Commissioner Vallette agreed.
Planning CommisSion Minutes
-2-
January 16, 1992
Chairman McNiel stated that the pylon should include only the name of the
center or possibly the center plus the major tenants.
Mr. Wattson responded that the cost of the sign is not justified for the sole
purpose of identifying the center. He said many tenants within the center had
already expressed a need to be identified on the sign because of their
business orientation towards freeway traffic (i.e., Chevron, In-N-Out, etc.).
Commissioner Melcher suggested that only the freeway oriented businesses be
identified on the pylon sign.
Brad Buller, City Planner, recommended that staff and the applicant provide
examples of existing freeway signs for the Commission's consideration in
evaluating the pylon for Foothill Marketplace.
Chairman McNiel stated that he has seen very few "good" freeway signs.
Commissioner Melcher said that he knew of a sign he thought was good but that
he did not believe the rest of the Commission would agree--the identification
for Tustin Marketplace.
Chairman McNiel agreed with Commissioner Melcher's assessment that the
Commission would not care for the design; he thought it is a bad example.
Mr. Buller stated that staff will obtain examples of designs for the
Commission to review.
Mr. Murphy suggested that the Commission con~nent on the sign design proposed
for plaza tenants. The applicant is proposing a metal cabinet with individual
letters on the cabinet. Only the letters and the logo will be illuminated.
The past Commission direction has been to use individual channel letters.
Commissioner Melcher asked that a cross-section be provided through the entire
fascia to include the cornice and the lintel. He felt the cabinet would look
awkward with the molding around the cabinet positioned between the cornice and
lentil.
Mrl Holt stated the reason for the cabinet was to avoid the continual repair
of the fascia as individual tenant signs are changed. He presented a series
of pictures to illustrate his point.
The Commissioners expressed serious reservations about the use of the cabinet.
They felt it looks too much like a can sign.
Mr. Bullet recommended that staff and the applicant sit down together to
review alternative signs for inclusion in the program. He stated staff would
try to obtain pictures of freeway signs for review at the next meeting.
The Commission directed the applicant to work with staff on revisions to the
sign program. They commented that a subsequent workshop could be scheduled
upon completion of the revisions and review by staff.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 16, 1992
The Commission recessed from 10:25 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN - Discussion of Medium and Low-Medium development
standards in the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, presented a brief overview summarizing
previous meetings regarding the related application proposed by U. S. Homes.
Commissioner Tolstoy posed the following questions: 1) Should the areas
under consideration be deleted from the Etiwanda Specific Plan area?$ and
2) What are the specific objectives for development in the affected areas?
Chairman McNiel thought that the "driving force" of the Etiwanda Specific Plan
is the area north of Base Line Road.
Commissioner Tolstoy felt that the area south of Base Line was included in the
specific plan because of its link with "old Etiwanda."
Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner, stated that the Etiwanda Specific Plan is
intended to protect the separate identity of Etiwanda through the use of
paseos, entry statements, rock curbs, etc. He observed that the area south of
the Devore Freeway is now discontinuous and unrelated to the balance of
Etiwanda since the freeway acts as a natural buffer.
Commissioner Vallette remarked that the development standards should be
studied closely to ensure that densities do not become lower simply by
providing much larger corner and cul-de-sac bulb lots in trade for a majority
of the lots being minimum size. She suggested that these lots not be included
when determining the average lot size within a project.
Mr. Kroutil commented that the concept of providing a minimum average lot size
was initiated with the Etiwanda Specific Plan.
Commissioner Vallette linked the architectural expectations for projects
within Etiwanda with the concepts of reduced lot coverages to create projects
with the character intended for Etiwanda.
Mr. Kroutil felt that any homogenous changes to the Etiwanda Specific Plan and
other Specific Plans or the Development Code will reduce individual community
identity. He stated that maximum lot coverages were established in the City
not only for when the initial residences are built, but more importantly to
deal with later problems created by individual owners constructing additions
and accessory structures. He commented that at the time of Specific Plan
adoption, the City was more concerned with new projects providing only
"starter homes" for lower income groups and first time buyers~ hence, the City
adopted a minimum residence size of 1,000 square feet to alleviate this
Planning Commission Minutes
-4-
January 16, 1992
concern. He indicated that at the time there was no concern that homes may
actually be too large for their lots.
Commissioner Melcher felt that the Etiwanda Specific Plan does not recognize
that garages were located in rear yards and served by alleys and that streets
were predominantly in a grid pattern. He suggested that the City explore
alley served neighborhoods for residential garage access.
Brad Buller, City Planner, noted that there has been opposition to alley
served neighborhoods in the past because of concerns with safety and
maintenance. He asked the commission if there might be a way to achieve this
"look" without actually providing alleys.
Mr. Kroutil added that "informal" site planning (i.e., curvilinear streets,
setback variety, etc.) has been preferred with previous projects because of
the look of County approved projects in the immediate area, which has a
predominantly grid pattern circulation system with little streetscape variety.
Commissioner Vallette suggested that a minimum variation in lot size be
adopted to encourage a greater variety of lot sizes and building setbacks to
provide greater streetscape variety.
Mr. Hayes suggested that the Commission consider what is the most appropriate
type of development for the affected areas and what development standards
should be applied to ensure this type of development. He warned the
Commission that if the Basic Standards are "loosened" and the Con~nission
prefers Planned Unit Developments with common open space, developers will have
less incentive to do the innovative projects if higher densities are possible
under Basic Development Standards. Therefore, he suggested the Optional
Development Standards should be studied closely to provide incentive to
developers to propose innovative developments.
Mr. Buller explained that it may be hard to recapture the traditional Etiwanda
look with the current development standards for this area. He stated that the
Commission may consider the possibility of requiring building envelopes
similar to those required in hillside areas to achieve the appearance of
greater separation between residences.
Commissioner Melcher felt that the affected areas should be restudied in light
of the neighborhood surroundings. He suggested that limiting roof pitches to
a maximum slope of 5 to 12 and ribbon driveways to rear yard garages should be
encouraged. He felt that half-acre lot areas constructed throughout Etiwanda
were not delivering the "rural atmosphere" as intended by the Etiwanda
Specific Plan.
Commissioner Vallette expressed her preference for requiring reduced lot
coverage, which may lead to smaller homes on smaller lots.
Commissioner Chitlea thought that small homes along the Devore Freeway may
become rental properties within a short time which may inherently become
poorly maintained and project a negative image of the City for freeway
Planning Commission Minutes -5- January 16, 1992
travelers. She felt that planned communities with Homeowner's Associations
would lead to better maintained and more aesthetically pleasing projects.
Mr. Kroutil summarized the main thoughts of the workshop and felt that
imagination will be a key in solving the issues mentioned in the workshop.
Chairman McNiel felt that there should be no rush to encourage smaller houses
given his previous experience on the Commission when the City worked for
larger houses and created a minimum residence size requirement.
Commissioner Vallette restated her main concerns: 1) Maximum lot coverages
should be studied and possibly reduced$ and 2) A sensitive land use transition
should be provided between the affected areas and the more traditional
Etiwanda developments north of Base Line Road.
Mr. Hayes again summarized the main Commission concerns and asked the
Commission to think about the most appropriate type of development for the
Medium and Low-Medium zones in Etiwanda and developing standards to further
encourage this type of development.
, , , ,
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Bullet
Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes
-6-
January 16, 1992