HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995/10/03 - Agenda Packet DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
ACTION COMMENTS AND MINUTES
TUESDAY OCTOBER 3, 1995 5:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Heinz Lumpp John Melcher Nancy Fong
Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Dave Barker Larry McNiel
CONSENT CALENDAR
The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as
plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting.
5:00 p.m.
(Miki) DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13566 - RALECO - The design review of building
elevations and detailed site plan for a previously approved residential subdivision
consisting of 21 lots on 8.9 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling
units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the south side of Summit
Avenue (Wilson Avenue) and west of San Sevaine Wash Place - APN: 226-291-12;
226-301-19 through 28; and 226-311-4 through 8 and 22-26.
PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS
This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding _
their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although
the Committee may open the meeting for public input.
5:15.m.
(Scott) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 95-23 - THE
MULVANNY PARTNERSHIP - A request to construct a 24,045 square foot addition
to an existing commercial building (Price Club) in the Regional Related Commercial
designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (Subarea 4), located on the south
side of foothill Boulevard between I-15 and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 229-031-35 and
43. (Continued from September 20, 1995).
PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the
Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may
receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per
individual.
ADJOURNMENT
1, Mary Lou Gragg, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true,
accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 27,1995, at least 72 hours prior to the
meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga.
CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS
5:00 p.m. Miki Bratt October 3, 1995
DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13566 - RALECO - The design review of building elevations and
detailed site plan for a previously approved residential subdivision consisting of 21 lots on 8.9 acres of
land in the Low Residential District(2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located
on the south side of Summit Avenue(Wilson Avenue)and west of San Sevaine Wash Place -APN: 226-
291-12; 226-301-19 through 28; and 226-311-4 through 8 and 22-26.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, John Melcher,Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Nancy Fong for Miki Bratt
The Committee recommended approval with the following condition:
1. Provide 2 by 6 foot trim for all windows.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
5:00 p.m. Scott Murphy September 19, 1995
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 95-23 - THE MULVANNY
PARTNERSHIP: A request to construct a 24,045 square foot addition to an existing commercial
building(Price Club)in the Regional Related Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific
Plan(Subarea 4), located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between 1-15 and Etiwanda Avenue -
APN: 229-031-35 and 43. (Continued from September 20, 1995).
Design Parameters:
The site is currently developed with a 11,325 square foot Price Club facility. Parking for the building
is provided to the north and west. Truck loading is provided at the southeast comer of the building.
With the application,the applicant will be extending the building to the west roughly 66 feet. Three rows
of parking will be eliminated with the expansion. Based on previous actions by the Design Review
Committee and the Planning Commission,the applicant is showing the relocation of the northerly east-
west drive aisle to create a four-way intersection south of In-N-Out Burger.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project:
1. With the expansion of the building,the applicant is proposing to extent the colonnade to the west
across the front of the addition and turn the corner to the south consistent with the current design.
The extension of the colonnade, however, eliminates the symmetry of the entry. The colonnade
could be extended to the east to help balance the entry but will not match the new addition.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed,and time permitting,the Committee
will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. As with the previous application, the traffic cones from the front of the entry should be removed
to allow vehicular access across the drive aisle to the east. This drive aisle is a major component
of the interior circulation system and blocking aisle forces additional traffic to the north,
congesting the other drive aisles. Traffic control measures (e.g. speed bumps, signage, etc.) can
be installed to regulate speeds across the front of the store.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Materials should be consistent with the existing facility.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the application subject to conditions
deemed appropriate to address the previous issues. The Environmental Assessment is subject to Planning
Commission approval. Unless otherwise desired,the Development Review application will be approved
by the City Planner.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, John Melcher,Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Scott Murphy
DRC AGENDA
DR 95-23 -THE MULVANNY PARTNERSHIP
October 3, 1995
Page 2
The Committee reviewed the application and felt that the traffic circulation across the front of the main
entry should be resolved prior to any further discussion of the architecture. The Committee noted that
the cones remain across the front of the entry despite comments from Price Costco representatives that
the cones would be removed. Even if the cones are removed, the Committee expressed concern about
the safety of pedestrians entering and exiting the entry given the close proximity to the drive aisle travel
lanes. The whole issue needs to be reviewed by the applicant and return for Design Review Committee
review and approval.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
October 3, 1995
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
Secretary