Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/04/04 - Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting April 4, 1991 Chairman McNiel called the adjourned meeting of the Planning Commission to order at approximately 9:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Larry McNiel, John Melcher, Peter Tolstoy, Wendy Vallette ABSENT: Suzanne Chitiea STAFF PRESMNT: Nannette Bhaumik, Aeeietant Landscape Designer; Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Colemen, Principal Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Steve Hayes, Associate Planner; Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer; Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner · , , , , PRELIMINARY ORAL PRESENTATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-42 - HUGHES INVESTMENTS - The development of an integrated shopping center including 15 commercial buildings totaling 320,975 square feet and a service station/car wash building totaling 2,300 square feet on 31.13 acres of land with Phase I development consisting of 5 buildings totaling 267,960 square feet on approximately 22 acres in the Regional Related Office/ Commercial District of the Victoria Community Plan, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west of the future Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 229-021-10, 15, 19, and 28. Related File: Tentative Parcel Map 13808· Architect/Engineer: Geoff Reeslund and Victor Giudici, SGPA Architecture and Planning; Douglas Newcomb, Douglas Newcomb Inc. Landscape Architecture Owner/Applicant: John Potter, Hughes Investments The purpose of the preliminary oral presentation was to familiarize the Planning Commission with this project prior to the regular design review meeting on April 18, 1991. This workshop had been specifically requested by the development team to expedite processing by receiving feedback on the major design issues, with the understanding that the project has not been formally accepted as complete for processing. Brad Buller, City Planner, opened with a brief overview of the project and introduced the development team to the Commission. John Potter, Hughes Investments, introduced the representatives in attendance from K-Mart, Home Depot, and the architect. Geoff Ree&lund, SGPA Architecture and Planning, highlighted the site constraints and design parameters of the property. He then addressed the Design Review Comments for the project as well as other secondary design issues mentioned by staff during the initial processing of the project. Finally, he presented an overview of the general architectural concept. Jack Frank, representing Home Depot, addressed the design issues associated with the turn-off lane for loading in front of the Home Depot. Chairman McNiel asked if the Upland Home Depot had a similar pull-off area. Mr. Frank responded affirmatively. Commiseio~er Tolstoy questioned who would be loading cars and trucks in the pull-off lane and where the cart storage areas were located (inside or outside). Mr. Buller briefly summarized the storage and screening requirements for carts within all new projects. He stated that the project will be conditioned for indoor cart storage, consistent with the current Planning Commission policy for new projects. Mr. Frank presented a floor plan of Home Depot to clarify the location of the grade level doors, which may be visible from Foothill Boulevard. Chairman McNiel asked the distance from the grade level doors to Foothill Boulevard. Mr. Reeslund responded approximately 300 feet. Mr. Frank then addressed the garden center wall design comment, stressing the need for open fencing for the upper portion of the wall to maintain a flow of air throughout the garden center. Richard Williams, representing K-Mart, focused on the issues of garden center fencing and angled one-way parking in front of the K-Mart pad. His rationale for open fencing also involved the need for air circulation. He reported that numerous traffic studies done by K-Mart have shown that the 60 degree parking with one-way aisles is the safest and most efficient circulation for their customers' needs. Mr. Potter indicated that the main entry drive aisle from Day Creek Boulevard acted as a natural barrier between the two types of parking configurations (Home Depot and K-Mart). Planning Commission Minutes -2- April 4, 1991 Mr. Buller pointed out that similar angled parking situations have been conceptually approved within shopping centers in the immediate neighborhood. Chairman McNiel referenced circulation problems with the Home Depot Shopping Center in Upland and hoped similar problems could be avoided within the proposed center. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned the feasibility of the perimeter circulation system around the main parking area. Mr. Reeslund stated that the primary area of Commissioner Tolstoy's concern (near the service station and fast food pads) was being restudied because of the design concern of accessibility to the service station. Chairman McNiel asked for an explanation of the street width/median transition of Day Creek/Pioneer. Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer, provided a technical explanation of why the street width transition was needed and how it will work. She also explained how the street would be stri]~ed at the tz~r~sition. Chairman McNiel suggested that additional strength and substance should be added architecturally by varying blank building planes through additional detailing. Commissioner Vallette questioned the grade difference between the Home Depot and Foothill Boulevard. It was confirmed that it was approximately 7 feet. Commissioner Vallette responded that she liked the clean, simple architectural approach and the use of the tile domes as a concept. Commissioner Melcher summarized his feelings about the main points of the workshop: 1) The architecture was satisfactory on the back (west) elevations of Home Deport and K-Mart; 2) the oral comments regarding the reconfiguration of the service station seemed to be in the right direction; 3) the barrier for the Home Deport loading zone was not needed; 4) the 60 degree, one-way parking in front of K-Mart was acceptable; 5) more usable pedestrian space should be provided between building pads; and 6) the general architectural concept was acceptable. He commended the architect for starting with a positive, detail-sensitive approach. Commissioner Tolstoy expressed his concern for the potential viewing of roof equipment from the Devore Freeway. Mr. Bulier suggested that the applicant prepare a sight line model/study for review by the Planning Commission. , , , , , Planning Commission Minutes -3- April 4, 1991 II. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-12 - WESTERN PROPERTIES - Review of an interim design solution in lieu of the construction of Major 4 and Building M within Phase III. Rick Mager, representing Lewis Homes, gave a brief overview of the Town Center project. Mr. Mager indicated that the potential tenant for Major 4 (Child's World) had terminate~ their expansion plans and Lewis Homes was working with a new tenant for the building. He reported the new tenant requires a slightly different building, which necessitates a change in the plans. As a result, Lewis Homes wished to pursue the temporary barricade to allow Montgomery Wards to open prior to the construction of Major 4 and Building M. He proposed that the pedestrian access across the front of the building pad would be installed prior to Wards' opening and will be maintained during construction of Major 4 and Building M. The Commissioners discussed the issue and recommended approval subject to the following conditions: The barricade should be installed prior to the occupancy of Montgomery Wards. 2. The barricade should be mair~tained 24 hours a day. The graphics and lettering used on the barricade should be consistent with the existing graphics and lettering of Town Center. If the construction of Major 4 and Building M does not commence within 180 days of the installation of the barricade, the barricade would be removed and the area should be planted and irrigated. Any modifications to Major 4 and/or Building M should be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. · , , , , III. MULTI-FAMILY STANDARDS STUDY - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The review and discussion of various development standards and design guidelines for multi-family projects. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the format of this workshop was to go over the topics of discussion, one by one, as outlined in the staff report. There was consensus from the Commission to require the developer to explain in writing how they designed the project to meet the City's policies, guidelines, and standards. Commissioner Melcher preferred not to see cookie-cutter type standards. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the City needs to set minimum standards. Stan Bell, Lewis Homes, stated he would like to know the minimum standards. Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 4, 1991 Gary Luque, William Lyon Company, stated that current codes for open space and recreational amenities are adequate. Jary Cockroft, Lewis Homes, stated that the type of amenities would affect the cost of the Homeowner Association (HOA) fees. Stan Bell, Lewis Homes, said that if the HOA fees are too high, there will not be any buyers. Commissioner Tolstoy disagreed with Lewis Homes with regard to the recreational amenities being market-driven. Commissioner Vallette stated that the community desires quality projects and providing amenities beyond what the market indicates is important. Mr. Bullet stated that the direction from the City Council was to have some new standards in place before the next multi-family project. The coneensue of the Commission was that they need more time to review the staff report and provide the direction. Another workshop was scheduled for April 11, 1991, at 3:30 p.m. in the Rains Room at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. · , , , , The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -5- April 4, 1991