HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992/08/18 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
August 18, 1992
McDonald's Pre-Application Review
Commissioner John Melcher called the adjourned meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 4:40 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 (arrived at 4:50 p.m.) John
Melcher, Peter Tolstoy, Wendy Vallette
ABSENT:
Suzanne Chitiea
STAFF PRESENT:
Brad Buller, City Planner; Betty Miller, Associate Civil
Engineer; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner
PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 92-05 - McDONALD'S - Review of conceptual plans for the
development of a fast food restaurant and retail building located on the east
side of Haven Avenue, north of Highland Avenue.
Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, gave a brief overview of the pre-application
procedure.
Rod Lucio, McDonald's Corporation, presented the past history on the site and
McDonald's current proposal.
Bill Roberds, McDonald's Corporation, recapped the costs of the previous
project, possible sale of the site, and the new concept with two users on the
pad.
Mr. Lucio indicated that the landscaped area on the south side of the building
was anticipated to be a playland in the future.
Mr. Murphy outlined the major staff concerns with the project. These
included:
1. Parking distribution
2. Circulation
a. "Right only" at the southwest corner of the site
b. Drive aisle at the northeast corner of the site
3. Tying the buildings together
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if McDonald's would be operating the retail
building.
Mr. Roberds responded that it would be McDonald'a hope to sell the building to
someone in the retail industry.
Chairman McNiel arrived at this time. He asked questions about the access to
the drive-thru lane, the parking layout, and closure of the driveway at the
southwest corner.
Commissioner Melcher felt that the applicant needed to think about the future,
specifically when the freeway is constructed. He questioned if this facility
will meet future demands. Mr. Melcher also felt that the circulation seemed
forced. He expressed concern about the retail building being bordered on two
sides by the drive-thru lane and how those elevations would be addressed. He
stated that plans for the entire pad should be reviewed if the applicant
decided to pursue the proposal.
Commissioner Tolstoy noted that this is the only shopping center in the area
and questioned whether the facility was of sufficient size to accommodate
future needs. He thought the plan seemed to be appropriate for the present
but questioned if it would be for the future. He felt that the distribution
of parking away from the drive-thru facility was not appropriate. He also
thought the exit drive aisle at the southwest corner was too close to the
intersection. Mr. Tolstoy added that sufficient landscaping should be
provided adjacent to the drive-thru lane. While no building elevations were
submitted for review, he felt that the buildings should be designed to blend
in with the center's architectural theme and the two buildings should be
integrated together.
Brad Buller, City Planner, felt that the two buildings should be constructed
at the same time.
Commissioner Vallette agreed with the other Commissioners that the
architecture of the two buildings must be integrated. She also thought the
parking needed to be more evenly distributed. Commissioner Vallette felt that
the playland location was acceptable if at least 10 feet of landscaping was
provided between the playland and the drive aisle. She did, however, express
concern about the plans for any future expansion and how this area might be
impacted.
Commissioner Melcher stated that the signalized drive on Haven Avenue will
receive increased usage when the freeway is constructed and the access to
Highland is deleted. Additionally, he was concerned that cars would be
stacked out into the drive aisle during peak hours.
Commissioner Tolstoy indicated that the applicant should show the playland and
the building integration with the formal submittal.
Chairman McNiel suggested the buildings be reoriented to place them adjacent
to the street to screen the parking. Also, he felt that the second building
was ill-served by having the drive-thru on two sides. Chairman McNiel felt
Planning Commission Minutes -2- August 18, 1992
that the drive-thru facility was probably undersized for current use, let
alone for future needs.
Mr. Murphy recapped the Commission's discussion, noting that areas to be
considered with future submittals include, but are not limited to, the
following:
1. Revise the drive-thru lane to minimize impact to the second building.
2. The architecture of the two buildings should be integrated together and
tie into the center design.
3. A better parking distribution should be explored in order to provide more
parking in closer proximity to the drive-thru facility.
4. The applicant should re-evaluate the size of the facility to meet present
and future needs.
5. The design and location of the drive aisle connection to the signalized
entry was of concern.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes -3- August 18, 1992