Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995/05/10 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting May 10, 1995 Chairman Barker called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 8:15 p.m. The meeting was held in the De Anza Room at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Heinz Lumpp, John Melcher, Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Steve Hayes, Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer APPLICANT/DEVELOPER: Gary Luque, Greg Hoxworth, Robert McLendon, Chuck Beecher, and Mike Lasley - Lewis Development Corporation; Greg George - Home Depot; Mark Bertone - Madole and Associates; Andrew Feola, Greg Mendoza - Feola, Carli & Archuleta Architects; Frank Coda, Vasanthi Ramahthan, Mark Shenouda - Greenberg Farrow Architects; Mike Sweeney - Land Concern NEW BUSINESS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-11 - WESTERN LAND PROPERTIES - The proposed development of an integrated shopping center totaling 501,324 square feet on 47.33 acres of land with proposed phase one development consisting of a 136,953 square foot Home Depot home improvement center in the Mixed Use (Commercial, Office, Residential) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-18 and 24. Related Files: Terra Vista Community Plan ~unendment 95-01 and General Plan Amendment 95-01B. Brad Buller, City Planner, introduced the Commissioners to the development team and stated the purpose of the workshop. He noted the status of the related applications and framed the major issues for Commission discussion. Gary Luque, Lewis Development Corporation, introduced the development team and referenced the proposed project timing for the Home Depot. He briefly mentioned his concern with the requirements for street improvements with the initial phase of development. Mr. Buller suggested that, if the Commission wished to discuss this item, it could be done in conjunction with the topic of vehicular circulation, which is included on the workshop agenda. Greg Hoxworth, Lewis Development Company, elaborated on how this center was different from other shopping centers in Terra Vista, in that all of the users are proposed to be of the larger, major-tenant variety and none of the smaller tenants typical of most centers. Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, discussed the neighborhood setting and presented the concerns related to locating this project in the existing neighborhood. Commissioner Tolstoy stated how, in the early days of the City, the Commission was very sensitive to development in the surrounding neighborhood and that is why the area in question was designated as a mixed use site. He said it was felt that mixed use zoning would allow a better buffer to be planned and provided between the site and the existing subdivision of homes and any newly planned developments adjacent to the site. Andy Feola, Feola, Carli & Archuleta Architects, detailed the thought process behind the proposed architectural and site planning concept. Mark Bertone, Madole & Associates, explained the technical aspects of the site grading and drainage situation. Commissioner Tolstoy asked how far the building is set back from Rochester Avenue on the new site plan alternative presented at tonight's workshop. Mike Lasley, Lewis Development Corporation, replied that it is now approximately 90 feet back from the Rochester Avenue face of curb. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned the development team about the proposed trail along Rochester Avenue. Mr. Lasley reported that a meandering sidewalk would be used along the entire frontage of Rochester Avenue. Commissioner Melcher asked how wide the ultimate right of way for Rochester Avenue will be and how far the proposed 4-story hotel on the northeast corner of Rochester and Foothill will be located from the existing residences. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner,.presented a site plan of the hotel indicating it is approximately 125 feet from the closest existing residence. Commissioner Lumpp observed that the proposed location of the Home Depot is approximately 135 feet from the closest residence. He felt that if the building were moved back further from the property line, a traffic circulation problem, similar to that at their Upland store, would be created. In addition, he expressed concerns that the modified plan includes a loss of landscaping against the east elevation of the building and a new vehicular access, which he felt could potentially create additional traffic hazards on site. Finally, he suggested that the best way to lower the profile of the building, as seen from Rochester Avenue, would be to add on elements at a lower, more pedestrian scale, such as colonnades, overhead trellises, etc. Commissioner McNiel objected to the new driveway along Rochester Avenue, noting the traffic congestion would increase. He strongly urged the developers to provide intensified landscaping along the east side of Home Depot and consider further lowering the pad elevation of the building. He asked who would be maintaining the landscaping along the perimeter of Home Depot. Mr. Lasley stated that Lewis Management Corporation will maintain the entire shopping center landscaping. Commissioner Melcher asked for a conceptual design of the abutting residential project to the north in order to get a better idea of how the two uses interrelate (or conflict) with each other. PC Adjourned Minutes - 2 - May 10, 1995 Commissioner Tolstoy asked for clarification as to where the Rochester trail is now proposed. Mr. Lasley described, in detail, the original trail concept and its relationship to the mixed use site and the new concept on the site perimeter acting as an additional buffer between the adjacent land uses. Conunissioner Tolstoy noted that with the trail proposed on the project perimeter, an even greater opportunity will exist to provide the type of buffer needed between the two very different land uses. Commissioner Melcher requested that the width of the trail feature be similar to the width of other greenway trails used throughout Terra Vista. Commissioner Tolstoy commented that perhaps the Terra Vista Community Plan should be amended in order to address the economic changes related to the "big box" tenant market anticipated for the future. Mr. Buller asked for clarification on the setback issue, whether the Commission felt the originally proposed location, 45 feet back, was preferred to the new 90-foot setback presented to the Commission this evening. No consensus of the Commission occurred at this time; however, the Commission did concur that the trail along Rochester should be upgraded. Mr. Hayes framed the vehicular circulation issue for the Commissioners. Chairman Barker asked for clarification regarding the circulation pattern around the pick-up canopy. Mr. Hoxworth elaborated on the function and circulation around the pick-up canopy, as well as the interior function in the immediate area of the canopy. Frank Coda, Greenberg Farrow Architects, embellished further on the interior function of the area surrounding the pick-up canopy area. Commissioner Melcher observed that truck traffic will be less intrusive if truck traffic is limited to Poplar Drive, as with the original scheme. Commissioner Lumpp noted the traffic problems created near the In-N-Out Burger in the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center, and he expressed hope that resolutions to the traffic concerns could be addressed better in this situation. Commissioner Tolstoy also noted that better stacking should be provided at key vehicular access points rather than at Foothill Marketplace. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, explained the problems associated with moving the Rochester access point to a location further south along the project frontage. Commissioner Lumpp explained why he felt the parking lot layout in front of the Home Depot works because it disperses traffic and does not create well-marked "speedways" in the parking lot. Commissioner McNiel expressed his concerns with the layout of the parking area adjacent to the Home Depot, noting that a more pronounced access aisle should be provided to connect the Home Depot parking area with the balance of the site. PC Adjourned Minutes - 3 - May 10, 1995 Commissioner Tolstoy noted that most people coming from the north will decide to use Rochester Avenue. Mr. Hayes referenced the linear arrangement of the buildings and asked for Commission input on this issue. Mr. Feola talked about the uniqueness of the project and how the promenade element actsas a focal point for the storefronts. He noted that the movement in the storefronts had been increased since the December workshop. Chairman Barker noted his concern that the solid wall of buildings does not have a penetra~i0n (i.e., plaza) and stretches for the same distance as from Target to Ross in the Terra Vista Town Center. Commissioner Melcher asked how wide the pedestrian walkway is under the trellis. Greg Mendoza, Greenberg Farrow Architects, responded that it is planned to be 10 feet. Commissioner McNiel recommended that some landscaping be introduced in front of the Home Depot as well. Commissioner Lumpp stressed the importance of providing logical and clear pedestrian connections to link the entire project. Mr. Feola explained to the Commissioners how the movement in the promenade element is substantial, not just straight as earlier commented. Commissioner Lumpp recommended that the treatment in front of the Home Depot be softened in some way to be more consistent with the rest of the project and be carried across the front of the garden center area. He recommended that the architect explore the possibility of moving the Home Depot south to aid in breaking up the linear effect along the storefronts. He again stressed the importance of providing a linear pedestrian connection from the west to east side of the project. Mr. Lasley explained the problems associated with moving the driveways along Orchard Avenue relative to providing a pedestrian connection along the lower-half of the project area. Chairman Barker noted that the project still appears quite linear in two dimensions. Commissioner McNiel requested that the applicant identify the pedestrian connections better for major entrances to parking areas. Mike Sweeney, Land Concern, highlighted the attributes of the storefront promenade feature, stressing that the feature extends over the entire storefront area instead of being concentrated in one specific plaza area. Mr. Buller asked the Commission for clarification on the pedestrian circulation system. Chairman Barker asked for input from other Commissioners as to whether the pedestrian circulation as proposed meets the intent and goals of the Terra Vista Community Plan. Commissioner Lumpp felt that it would, with the suggested changes. PC Adjourned Minutes - 4 - May 10, 1995 Mr. Mendoza presented the proposed revisions to the other site planning issues raised in the staff report. Commissioner Melcher felt that more room should be allowed for the proposed drive-thru restaurants for maneuvering, parking, and outdoor eating areas. Commissioner McNiel expressed his concern with placing a service station adjacent to the major project entrance. Commissioner Lumpp stated that it would be his preference to provide sit-down restaurants and that the service station be provided at the corner of Foothill and Orchard~ Chairman Barker expressed his concern with the garden shop on the west side of Major One. Mr. Lasley suggested that this issue be deferred and considered with the appropriate phase of development. Mr. Sweeney elaborated on the proposed activity center concept and the differences between a formal versus the proposed informal design. Mr. Buller further framed the issue for the Commission, explaining the concept used on the Masi project and how the concepts could be tied together to create some uniformity for all four corners. Chairman Barker stated his preference for the original, more informal concept. Commissioner McNiel stated why he feels the pedestrian activity centers are a good idea. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that the applicant could take advantage of providing different levels of activity at each corner within the activity center. Commissioner Melcher clarified that the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (FBSP) requires consistency among the four corners within an activity center and that anything else would be in violation of the spirit of the plan. However, he disagreed with the FBSP requirement in this situation, and felt that the original concept of the applicant was highly preferred. Commissioner Lumpp noted that the historic relevance of the corner and its buildings could be taken into consideration with the design of the activity center. Commissioner Melcher felt that the formal design could be applied once transitioning away from the corner to bring in the element of consistency with the Masi project and future development on the other corners. Commissioner Lumpp expressed his support for the unique individuality of the center. Mr. Feola stated that a design criteria package would be developed to ensure that the architecture of the pad buildings would be complementary to the line of major tenants. Mr. Lasley ensured the Commission that such guidelines could be enforced. PC Adjourned Minutes - 5 - May 10, 1995 Commissioner Melcher observed that Home Depot does not relate to the rest of the center in terms of architecture. Mr. Lasley explained the architectural differences to the Commission and pointed out the elements that tie the Home Depot to the rest of the center. Commissioner Tolstoy requested that something be done to soften the front elevation of Home Depot. Mr. Coda embellished on the function in front of the Home Depot and stated that maybe the promenade element could be extended to be in front of the garden center and on the east side of the building. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that the architecture did not have enough detail. Commissioner McNiel agreed with Mr. coda and thought that carrying the promenade element to be in front of the garden center and nursery would be a good idea. Chairman Barker felt that the elevations adjacent to existing and future residential development should be studied further. Mr. Feola presented the metal roof and its proposed use to the Commission and asked for comments. Two of the Commissioners did not like its proposed use. Commissioner McNiel noted that he did not object to its use on the surface, but he felt that it would create a precedent for a lack of quality design for the future. Mr. Buller asked for Commission comments on the central tower element. Chairman Barker did not like the low profile and bulk of the new central element and noted his preference for the original taller, more open and airy tower element. Commissioner Lumpp expressed the need for a significant focal feature (related to the clock tower element). Mr. Buller recapped the major comments generated from the workshop and recommended that another workshop be held, at which time a better phasing plan for on-site and off-site improvements be prepared. The meeting adjourned 12:05 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes - 6 - May 10, 1995