Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003/01/22 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting January 22, 2003 (6:00 p.m.) Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 6:05 p.m. The meeting was held in the Conference Room 2002 at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney; Jan Reynolds, RDA Analyst; Joe Stofa, Associate Engineer ATTENDEES: Victor Dubrowski, Code Consultants, Inc.; Donald Linane, Linane/Drews Architects; Michael Grandy, May Design&Construction; Randy Rathert,May Design&Construction; Rebecca Kounoa, Kvell Corcoran Associates; Robert Corcoran, Kvell Corcoran Associates NEW BUSINESS A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2003-00025- ROBINSON'S MAY-A request to review the design of a proposed, 180,000 square foot, two story department store on 2.5 acres of land located south of the future extension of Church Street and east of the future extension of Day Creek Boulevard and part of the Victoria Gardens Regional Center-APN: 227-201-35. Randy Rathert, May Design & Construction, introduced members of their design team that were present. He explained that the building being presented is a new design for Robinsons-May and different from any other concept used in California. He said the building has been designed with a more open floor plan, with the interior similar to their Irvine store, but more upscale. Robert Corcoran, Project Concept Design Architect, explained the design concept as reminiscent of the '50s era with colors that relate to the area. He indicated they began the design process with a clean sheet of paper; however, the building has similarities to the Irvine store, which was also designed by their firm. He explained that there are entrances on four sides of the building and the building is architecturally simple, with complex entries, and has been designed to orient both to the freeway and plaza areas. The developer showed a perspective of the two, low-rise (35 foot high) buildings proposed to be constructed by Forest City and attached to the plaza-oriented entrance. He reviewed the loading area at the southeast corner of the building and explained that deliveries occur at night. He indicated the loading bay would completely enclose the trailers from view because of the tuck-under design. He stated each of the four entrances is designed with canvas canopies. He commented that the loading dock would not have doors because if it is enclosed, it encroaches into their allowable lease square footage. Mr. Corcoran indicated that all roof equipment would be completely screened by a "penthouse" element designed to match the main building. He said the penthouse will not be visible, or will be barely visible, from most vantage points within Victoria Gardens, but will be visible from the I-15 Freeway. He explained that they tried to bring the building into pedestrian scale through the use of glass to bring the views into and out of the store. He commented that the different levels draw you into the building. Brad Buller, City Planner, identified the following areas of concern from staffs perception: • Pedestrian orientation. There are two key north-south passages past the Robinsons-May store from the parking lot. Pedestrian scale along those walls is a concern. • The loading dock should be enhanced to disguise it from the pedestrians. He suggested decorative pavement across the driveway. • Main entry decorative pavement should extend across the drive aisle. • Cornice articulation or corner treatments should be enhanced. Mr. Buller distributed color photographs of the Irvine store to the Commissioners. Mr. Rathert explained that legally they are limited on their total floor area and are at the maximum allowed; therefore, they cannot put a door across the entrance of loading dock. Commissioner Stewart stated she would like to see an enhanced cornice treatment, such as shown for the Irvine store. She indicated that better color banding is needed similar to the Irvine store. She liked the glass entries, but would also like to eliminate the canvas awnings and replace them with a more permanent structure. She felt the entrance should have more movement. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that an enhanced cornice treatment is needed. He agreed that awnings are not long-lived in this area because of the high winds. He suggested they consider a curved lattice as replacement. He liked the'50s era department store design concept. He felt that the east and west elevations are not pedestrian friendly. He suggested exploring landscaping to soften(both height and width) of the building. He stated that there is not enough articulation on the building. He said he would like some type of lattice/door treatment on the loading dock to be considered. Commissioner Macias said he agreed with all of the comments made by Commissioners Stewart and Tolstoy. He liked the Irvine photos presented. He agreed that the awnings would not work. He felt the colors are bland and suggested more earth tones be used. He expressed concern with the 1-15 corridor view and the view of the penthouse. He added that the building corners need treatment. He commented that the use of Palm trees could be considered. He concurred that the design needs rethinking to improve the pedestrian orientation. Chairman McNiel felt the design is ill fitting with Victoria Gardens. He described the design as a big square that is too mundane. He noted that he understands the sheer mass makes it difficult but was not convinced that the Irvine design is necessarily the answer. He suggested that color and texture could help. He asked whether lighting sconces would be provided along the sides of the building. Mr. Corcoran explained that their intent is to have light fixtures around the building. Chairman McNiel explained that he is looking for something that makes this a pedestrian friendly place. He felt that the south, east, and west elevations are not pedestrian friendly. He believed the loading dock is a concern and could become a problem in the wind; therefore, some treatment or door needs to be there. He added that the building entries are not attractive and appear utilitarian. Mr. Buller suggested that the developer might want to protect the loading space because it is exposed to high winds. He thought they may want to consider alternatives rather than scoring the building horizontally. He suggested tying the penthouse walls into the entrance element to give it more exposure. Mr. Buller suggested that the developer rework the long walls and entryways. He suggested they come back with details on lighting (and night lighting) along with the details of the PC Adjourned Minutes -2- January 22, 2003 architectural elements. He added that they should show the types of metal, texture, etc. proposed. He added that attention should be given to the loading dock details. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Macias, carried 4-0,to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, i4 B =der V ary PC Adjourned Minutes -3- January 22, 2003