Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995/04/12 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting April 12, 1995 Chairman Barker called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Barker then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROT T. C~T.T. COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Heinz Lumpp, John Melcher, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: Larry McNiel STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner , , , , ~NNOUNCRM~NTS ,. There were no announcements· , , , , NEW BUSINESS PRR-APPLICATION R~VIEW 95-01 - MCDON~r.D'S - The review of conceptual site plan and elevations for a fast food restaurant within an existing commercial/retail center in the 3egion Related Commercial designation (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between 1-15 and Etiwanda Avenue. APN: 229-031-35. Rod Lucio, McDonald's Corporation, presented the application. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He stated the main concerns with the project include: 1. The proposal does not comply with the Planning Commission interim drive-thru goals and policies in the following areas: Ae The minimum lot size should be 1 acre. The site proposed by the applicant is approximately .5 acre. The lot size can, however, be modified through the Development Review process if it is part of a Master Plan or integrated shopping center. The minimum floor area should be 2,500 square feet. The applicant is proposing a 2,307 square foot facility. The floor area requirement may be modified through the Development Review process. The parking and drive-thru lane should be set back 45 feet from the curb face. The application proposes a 33-foot setback for the drive-thru lane from the curb. The site plan should provide opportunities for landscape open space to promote safe and convenient pedestrian movement.' 2. The drive aisles do not meet the required 24-foot width. Parking stall dimensions shall be 9 feet x 18 feet. A traffic congestion problem currently exists on-site. The applicant has provided a traffic study to analyze the situation. The report recommends several improvements to correct existing conditions: The westerly and main entry be designed as all-way stops at their intersection with the east-west drive aisle. Staff has concerns about traffic backing onto Foothill Boulevard. Widen the drive aisle at the approach to the signalized intersection. This should be included with any future development applications. Contact Caltrans about modifying the traffic signal timing at the main entry. 5. A loading area should be provided for the facility. In conclusion, Mr. Murphy stated that the site is too small for the type and intensity of development proposed. Commissioner Lumpp asked why the cones are located at the Price Club entry. Mr. Murphy responded that, initially, the cones had been placed there to prevent customers from using the area to load their cars. He said that after the vestibule addition, the cones remained in place because of the close proximity of the building entry to the drive aisle. Commissioner Lumpp questioned why McDonald's would want to locate so close to In-N-Out Burger and another McDonald's inside of Wal-Mart. Mr. Lucio responded that McDonald's and In-N-Out cater to different clientele and can exist in the same center. He commented that proximity to the Wal-Mart store is not a factor because the Wal-Mart facility offers a limited menu and caters almost exclusively to the Wal-Mart patrons. Chairman Barker asked if the spacing of the free-standing pads along Foothill Boulevard was discussed during the review of the center's Master Plan. Mr. Murphy responded that the issue was not directly discussed because staff and the Commission were comfortable with the proposed pad spacing. Had the building spacing been reduced, Mr. Murphy felt the issue would have been raised. Commissioner Melcher concurred with staff's conclusion that the site is of insufficient size to accommodate the facility. He thought the level of development is too intense for the pad size and that the design did not provide a loading area for the facility. He further commented that the stacking lane appears inadequate to accommodate a typical McDonald's operation and that the facility at Haven and Highland was required to provide a stacking lane much deeper than the one proposed. He stated that in reviewing the original master plan, the driveway design adjacent to In-N-Oht was not ideal, but was needed to PC Adjourned Minutes -2- April 12, 1995 provide access to the southwest corner of the center. He thought the introduction of a McDonald's would further impact the on-site circulation. He commented that the Planning Commission approved a reduction in the setback to the In-N-Out drive-thru lane from 45 feet to 38 feet because no cars would be stacking along the street frontage--the lane is used for exiting the pick-up window. He also commented that In-N-Out was able to provide adequate stacking for their facility. Commissioner Melcher saw no justification for allowing McDonald's to deviate from the Planning Commission drive-thru policies. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the site is too small to accommodate the use. He affirmed that the center has a serious traffic problem already and the addition of McDonald's would make the situation worse. Commissioner Lumpp concurred that the traffic is horrendous. He thought, while there may be opportunities to resolve some of the problems, the site is too small and too many issues need to be addressed before he could consider McDonald's a viable project. Chairman Barker agreed that the addition of a McDonald's will exacerbate the existing traffic problem. He commented that the streetscape would become increasingly crowded, resembling a strip center. He thought the applicant was attempting to "shoe-horn" in a project in an attempt to circumvent the agreement between In-N-Out and the center's developer. He felt the area should remain parking. , , , , , PUBT.IC COMMRNTS There were no public comments at this time. , , · · , COMMISSION BUSINRSS There was no additional Commission Business. , , , , ~DJOURNM~NT The meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m. Acting Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes -3- April 12, 1995