HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993/01/19 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
January 19, 1993
Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission to order at 7:00 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, Wendy Vallette
ABSENT:
Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tolstoy
STAFF PRESENT:
Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal
Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Scott Murphy,
Associate Planner.
, , , ,
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 92-15 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS - A request to
construct approximately 161,000 square feet of retail space within a
previously approved commercial retail center in the Regional Related
Commercial designation (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan,
located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west of Etiwanda Avenue -
APN: 229-031-28 and 33.
Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
staff's acceptance of the design with a few refinements.
He indicated
Greg Wattson, Foothill Marketplace Partners, responding to the staff comments,
indicated agreement to providing the decorative paving in front of the major
tenants. He also agreed to a sidewalk connection from Etiwanda Avenue to
Food4Less and to the relocation of a medallion from Pad 4 to Pad 3. Mr.
Wattson did, however, feel that the wide sidewalk on the east side of
Food4Less was necessary to maintain access to the building.
Jim Bickel, Architect, indicated that landscaping on the south side of the
east loading dock for Food4Less was possible but expressed concern about the
type of landscaping because of the exhaust that would be generated by the
trucks. He stated that he would work with staff on tree locations along the
storefronts. Mr. Bickel indicated that the elements proposed for Majors 3 and
4 were historically consistent with the "Northern Mediterranean" style
proposed for the center. Mr. Bickel also stated his disagreement with the
staff suggestion to place a mural on the front elevation of the major tenant.
Chairman McNiel opened the hearing for discussion by the Commissioners.
Commissioner Melcher indicated that he would not be in favor of landscaping
along the loading dock unless it were limited to vines. He did not feel other
materials would survive. He asked the applicant to explore the angling of the
screen wall for the east loading dock of Food4Less as was done with the west
dock. He also stated that landscaping was crucial along the east side of
Food4Less and that vines should be provided for trellises. Commissioner
Melcher appreciated the improvements made to the building design and felt the
plans represent an enormous leap forward. He did, however, express concern
about the proportions of the entry elements for the Major 3, Michaels, and
PetsMart. Commissioner Melcher was concerned about the view from the east
side of the half-round element at the northwest corner of Food4Less where it
ties in with the arbor. And finally, he suggested that fencing similar to
that used at the Town Center be used to section off the pad area for Major 4
until it is ready to be constructed. He was not in favor of temporarily
planting trees in the area where Major 4 will be built.
Commissioner Vallette agreed with the architectural comments made by
Commissioner Melcher. She suggested that staff work with the applicant on the
design of the half-round element.
Chairman McNiel agreed with the use of vines at the loading dock, and the
designed fencing along the future pad area of Major 4. He suggested that a
freestanding trellis on the east side of Food4Less would be nice but he did
not want to impede pedestrian traffic. He thought landscaping should be
provided within the parking lot on the east side of Food4Less or additional
landscaping should be provided adjacent to the building. Chairman McNiel felt
that the front elevation of Food4Less is too plain compared to the rest of the
center and that Michaels' entry appears to be incomplete.
Commissioner Melcher suggested that the applicant explore layering elements,
varying the heights of the wainscot, etc., in order to provide more relief on
the major tenants.
Commissioner Vallette felt that too much decoration would detract from the
center.
All Commissioners agreed that the mural locations were acceptable as proposed
by the applicant.
Mr. Murphy indicated that staff would work with the applicant on the issues
identified and, if acceptable to the Commission, would review the revised
plans with the Design Review Committee.
The Commissioners agreed that the changes necessary to approve this phase were
minor and that the revisions could be reviewed by the Design Review Committee
at their next meeting. Following Design Review Committee approval, the
project will be scheduled for the next available Planning Commission meeting.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 19, 1993
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 19, 1993