Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002/02/27 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPC a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting February 27, 2002 Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was held in the De Anza Room at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: Rich Macias, John Mannerino STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Douglas Fenn,Associate Planner; Brent Le Count, Associate Planner NEW BUSINESS A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2002-00081 -RODRIGUEZ-Review of concept plans for a gated multi-family development on 12 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Vineyard Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard -APN: 207-211-06 and 36. Brad Buller, City Planner, reviewed the purpose and the basic procedure of the Pre-Application Review. Gil Rodriguez, Jr. stated he is the applicant and introduced himself to the Commission and gave a basic review of the project. He noted the proposed residential project still has some missing pieces and that the two parcels to the north would be incorporated into the project. He commented that his desire is for the architecture to mimic the appearance of the Klusman residence, which is north of the proposed project. Douglas Fenn, Associate Planner, reviewed the following design issues: 1. Maintain a 42-foot wide landscape setback along Vineyard Avenue. 2. Provide additional landscape buffer along the north property line between the future commercial uses to the north. 3. Provide 360-degree architecture on the residential buildings. The proposed building footprints appear to not match the proposed building elevation scheme. 4. Incorporate a blended architectural look of the Klusman residence to the north into the proposed residential units. 5. Provide a secondary access to the property to the north, or a pedestrian access as proposed and/or provide a crash gate. 6. Clarify parcels and uses to the north. 7. Potential grading issue of blocked views of existing residential uses to the south (existing site is about 12 feet higher). Commissioner Tolstoy thought a secondary access to the site is necessary,especially for emergency ' vehicles. He asked Mr. Rodriguez how the project would be parked. He commented that he feels the project may be underparked. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would like to see more information about the project. Commissioner Stewart also felt the project appears to be missing some pieces. She noted that she has concems about the parking and that the footprint of the building does not appear to match the building elevations. She indicated the project would have to have the required amenities sufficient for the project and wanted detailed information on the amenities. She also requested a stronger landscape buffer along the north property line. Chairman McNiel echoed the other Commissioners. He believed the units along the south property line should be adjusted to side onto the existing units to the south. He also wanted a stronger use of courtyards and indicated that guest parking should be provided. He commented that the proposed use is more suitable than the other proposals the Planning Commission has seen for the site. He stated that the project must have a strong relationship with the approved commercial project to the north. He also felt this project must have a connection to the existing trail along the west property line. Mr. Buller summarized the Commission's concems. He noted that the project overall is viable but needs more work. B. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2002-00086 — ISLANDS RESTAURANT—A request for review of architectural and site plan design concepts for a 5,267 square foot Islands Restaurant, including the use of exposed corrugated steel as a building material, on 1.3 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the southeast comer of Milliken Avenue and Foothill Boulevard -APN: 229-011-25. Brad Buller, City Planner, reviewed the purpose and basic procedures of the pre-application review. David Kendal, Lee and Sakahara Architects, presented the proposed design. Mr. Kendal distributed black and white reduced copies of another design that includes a pitched roof and a decorative tower feature accentuating the building entry. He asked the Commission's opinions about the building design. He acknowledged the visual prominence of the site and indicated that the new design now being presented is taller to address the street scene. Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, reviewed staffs concerns. He reported that when the Lowe's project was being processed in 1999, the Commission indicated that signature style architecture would be acceptable for the Lowe's restaurant pads so long as the architectural quality was high. He noted that since that time the Farmer Boys and Union Bank buildings have been reviewed,approved, and constructed, and that these buildings happen to take significant architectural cues from the Lowe's design. He asked that the Commission consider whether this establishes an architectural theme for the site, thus baring the signature architecture as proposed by Islands. Mr. Le Count also stated that should the Commission agree to signature architecture for Islands, staff would recommend that the architectural quality be at least on a par with the Lowe's building. He expressed concerns regarding the proposed building materials and thought the building lacks visual interest and change of plane. He felt the building should be designed to address the visually prominent location with frontage on Foothill Boulevard and Milliken Avenue. Finally, he indicated that the word"Fine"in "Fine Burgers and Drinks"would be considered ancillary advertising inconsistent with the City's Sign Ordinance and should be removed. PC Adjourned Minutes -2- February 27, 2002 • The Islands team indicated it would be acceptable to delete the word "Fine." Commissioner Stewart felt the building appears overly boxy and the front entrance should be restudied. She stated that she is not in favor of using corrugated metal as an exterior building material. She preferred the alternative design being presented including the tile roof and tower design for the entry. She stated that the north and west elevations facing the major boulevards must have accentuated architecture and that both of the designs presented are lacking in this requirement. Commissioner Tolstoy did not care for the original design with flat roof and corrugated metal. He noted that the site lies at a major intersection and is depressed below street level; therefore he preferred the decorative tower feature for the entry as shown on the revised second design but felt the remainder of the building lacks interest. He thought corrugated metal might be appropriate if it is also used on the inside the building. Chairman McNeil agreed with the other Commissioners but expressed opposition to the use of corrugated metal as an exterior building material. He said that even the second design alternative presented deserves restudy to better address the major street frontages. He thought that if the corners of the building could all be treated as well as the tower feature over the entrance, it might justify the less visually interesting intermediate wall areas. Chairman McNeil said that he is excited to see a proposal by Islands Restaurant and wishes the project much success. Mr. Buller summarized the Commission's concerns. He commented that the design of the building should take into account the depressed pad elevation and the visual prominence given the location at a major intersection. He noted the Commission appears to prefer the tower feature and elevating high quality architectural features as much as possible to establish adequate presence relative to street frontage. He added that the tower feature should therefore be continued on other aspects of the building. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at that time. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, i pis /Bra M.1.27 r Se etary PC Adjourned Minutes -3- February 27, 2002