Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992/06/10 - Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting June 10, 1992 Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Suzanne Chitlea, Larry McNiel, John Melcher, Peter Tolstoy, Wendy Vallette ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Steve Hayes, Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner; Steve Ross, Assistant Planner; Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary , , , , ANNOUNCEMENTS Deputy City Planner Otto Kroutil suggested that the Commission consider Item C before Item B. , , , , , APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried to adopt the minutes of April 22, 1992. , , , , , PUBLIC HEARINGS Ae ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-40 - FANCHER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - The development of a 1,989 square foot drive-thru fast food restaurant on .58 acres of land in the Vineyards Marketplace shopping center, which is within the Neighborhood Commercial District of the Victoria Planned Community, located on the east side of Milliken Avenue, south of Highland Avenue - APN: 227-801-09. Related file: Conditional Use Permit 89-08. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and distributed a copy of the conceptually approved master plan as well as the applicant's proposed site plan with parking and a drive-thru located between the restaurant and the plaza. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. John Potter, Hughes Investments, Two Corporate Plaza, Suite 220, Newport Beach, stated they are the project owners. He remarked that at the time of originally designing the project, it had been their intention to locate a fast food restaurant in the location now shown. He stated they had not shown a fast food restaurant with drive-thru on the original master plan because they would have had to provide a traffic study. He said it was their understanding they could request a revision of the master plan after securing a tenant so that they would know the tenant's parameters. He commented that it is typical in CC&Rs with supermarkets to include location restrictions and building envelopes for the other building pads on the site. He stated that Albertson's wants a fast food restaurant, as opposed to a sit-down restaurant, so there will not be competition over long-term parking. He stated the CC&Rs with Albertson's will not permit placing a building adjacent to the plaza. He noted that the City had received a copy of the CC&Rs. He understood the City's desire to orient toward the plaza and proposed extending the plaza material 50 linear feet adjacent to the parking lot and drive-thru area to bring it up to the edge of the Taco Bell pad. He suggested that tables, chairs, and umbrellas be added to enhance the pedestrian orientation. He proposed enhanced pavers across the parking lot area. He felt the drive-thru could adequately be screened from the street with mounding and low walls. He thought the Taco Bell building should be pulled away from the plaza because it is smaller than the bank building to the east of the plaza. He said they had tried diligently to devise a plan that would create a pedestrian connection to the plaza. He remarked that there are few food uses in Victoria. Commissioner Vallette asked the proposed height. Mr. Potter thought the height of the Taco Bell would be about 29-1/2 feet. Scott Duffner, Fancher Development Services, Inc., 1322 Bell Avenue, Suite l-H, Tustin, thought the usability of the area would be enhanced by their plan. He remarked that Taco Bell feels the pedestrian plaza is an asset to the shopping center and felt the proposed plan will utilize it. He noted that there is not currently a lot of pedestrian traffic in the area except from the adjacent housing. He felt that at the May 7, 1992, Design Review Committee meeting they had convinced the committee that they are physically restrained from relocating the building contiguous to the plaza, as shown in the approved master plan. He thought there would be an adequate truck loading area by utilizing a 12 foot x 40 foot area off the curb face. He indicated they were not proposing striping the area. He stated that they felt a one-way traffic pattern would be preferable for the site and they had met with the fire department and received an approval of their proposal to extend the landscaping to the north of the drive-thru entrance. Planning Commission Minutes -2- June 10, 1992 Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. He remarked that at the latest Design Review meeting it had been explained to the applicant that the City has little to do with CC&Rs between property owners and their tenants. He indicated the applicant had stated it was doubtful they could get Albertson's to agree to moving any building closer to the plaza because they want to preserve their sight line. He said that restriction was really not a problem the City had created; however, as a result, it was doubtful that any building could be built contiguous to the plaza. Chairman McNiel stated he could not think of any other use that would better utilize the plaza and he asked if the Commissioners could suggest a more appropriate use. He thought the applicant had addressed the concern regarding the need for limiting the access to the drive-thru to be one-way only. He questioned if the applicant had sufficiently addressed the connection from the building to the plaza. Commissioner Vallette requested clarification on Planning Commission Resolution 88-96, regarding design goals and policies for businesses with drive-thru facilities. She noted that the policies indicate the site shall be a minimum of 1 acre and the' proposed site only has .58 acres. She also observed that the goals call for a minimum floor area of 2,500 square feet while the application is for 1,989 square feet. She did not feel the application met the standards. Chairman McNiel noted that the policy stated the mimimum land area could be modified through the Design Review process when the location is within a Master Plan area or an integrated shopping center. Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner, stated the design policy had been adopted to develop criteria for free-standing buildings on small individual lots. He felt it was never intended to be applied to integrated shopping centers where lot lines are only drawn for the purposes of leasing property rather than developing property. He said the Commission should determine if the floor area met the intent of the guidelines. He said normally the site planning, architectural, and landscaping problems are worked out at Design Review before the application is forwarded to the Commission with a recommendation. He stated staff felt the Commission should determine if the use of a drive-thru restaurant is appropriate in this location and whether the use would function well without being contiguous to the plaza area. He suggested that if the Commission agreed with the use, it was staff's intention to return the item through the Design Review process to work out the details on loading, trash enclosures, stripping versus turf block, etc. He stated staff believes that regardless of the use, no building will be built immediately adjacent to the plaza. He said staff was looking for feedback on the use and whether the applicant had done enough in concept to connect the building with the newly proposed hardscape to the pre-existing plaza area. Commissioner Chitiea supported fast food use in the center. She felt there is a need for fast food restaurants in the area and Milliken is an appropriate boulevard. She recognized that no matter what the use, the building would not be closer to the plaza. She preferred that the drive-thru location be moved so that it would not intervene between the restaurant and the plaza. She felt Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 10, 1992 the plaza was constructed to be actively used and noted that the bank to the east of the plaza, also does not use the plaza. She felt a fast food restaurant would be of benefit to the community and would promote active use of the plaza. Commissioner Melcher felt the issue to be a site planning question rather than a use question. He thought it does not matter how much is spent on fancy paving, there is no connection to the plaza area when a parking lot and drive- thru lane intervene. He said the Commission must determine if it was willing to back away from its long held position that at shopping center corners with pad buildings, the pad buildings should be clustered around usable plazas. He did not think the plan to extend the plaza area along the west side of the parking lot would improve matters and he felt the plaza would not be used by fast food patrons. Commissioner Tolstoy said there is a problem with the circulation as shown. He felt there would be a conflict with the service station traffic with drivers backing out to leave the area and cars attempting to enter the restaurant. He felt the plaza is an asset to the shopping center and the proposed site plan precludes use of it. Commissioner Vallette did not feel that parking is appropriate next to the plaza area. She was not opposed to a fast food restaurant at the location. She indicated that if the Commission approved the project, she would like to see the window treatment extend above the height of the arches. She noted that the bank has reduced tower elements, and she proposed that the tower elements be reduced to be consistent with the bank. Chairman McNiel indicated he was not opposed to the use. He disagreed with Commissioner Melcher in that he felt the extension of the plaza area would be used more than the plaza itself because of its visibility. He did not feel it will ever be a high level pedestrian area because the Commission had permitted the bank building to built on the east side. He was not sure that the pedestrian use of the plaza would be enhanced by any use other than a fast food restaurant. He supported the use. Commissioner Tolstoy supported a fast food use, but he objected to the traffic pattern and the site plan. Commissioner Chitiea agreed with Commissioner Tolstoy regarding the site plan, but she felt the plaza would be utilized even less with another type of user. Commissioner Vallette suggested food users without drive-thrus. She did not feel a drive-thru is appropriate in the proposed location because of the limited space and parking adjacent to the pedestrian center. Chairman McNiel' did not feel the pad is large enough to support a restaurant without a drive-thru. Commissioner Vallette suggested a sandwich shop or yogurt shop might utilize the pedestrian area on the corner. She said she was not strongly opposed to the proposed use. Planning Commission Minutes -4- June 10, 1992 Mr. Hayes remarked that the intent was to return the item to resolve site planning and design review issues. commissioner Melcher questioned if the Commission action was advisory only rather than an action on the application. He felt it was a question of whether or not the site design, particularly the parking and drive-thru lane separating the use from the plaza, was supported by a majority of the Commission. Mr. Kroutil agreed that was correct. He said there would be another hearing, but staff was looking to see if the Commission would accept the drive-thru between the plaza and the building if all the other problems are resolved. Motion: Moved by Chitlea, seconded by McNiel, to accept the use and the positioning of the drive-thru in concept. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CMITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried , , , , ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14208 - SOUTHWEST DESIGN GROUP - The development of 32 condominium units on 3.0 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of Base Line Road, west of Alta Cueeta Drive - APN: 202-025-04, 7, 8, 13, and 14. Related Files: Development District Amendment 89-07 and Tree Removal Permit 91-40. Staff recommends issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration. Steve Ross, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Melcher questioned why the Tentative Tract was being heard before the Development District Amendment that would make the project consistent with the Development Districts Map. Mr. Ross stated that the draft resolution of approval included a condition that any approval would be subject to approval of the Development District Amendment. Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner, noted that when the General Plan was ammended several years ago, it was the intent of the City Council that the Development Districts Map not be amended until an actual project was submitted so a developer could illustrate that a project would work in the zone. Commissioner Vallette stated she thought the upper story on the ends was to have windows in the pop-out elements rather than merely architectural Planning Commission Minutes -5- June 10, 1992 elements. She suggested changes to enhance the ends of the building. She asked if the elements would not be seen upon entering the City from the east. Commissioner Coleman noted that the same pop-out elements occur on all multiple units except on the two flanking the main entry. He said it could be seen approaching the project on Base Line and while driving through the project. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Alan Smith, Southwest Design Group, 8632 Archibald Avenue, #201, Rancho Cucamonga, stated they accepted the conditions of approval. He felt it was a good project. He said they modified the end elevation, so that when there was a stairwell, there would be a two story element with a an upper arch window above and a regular window below. Commissioner Vallette thought that was only on one building near the recreation area. Mr. Smith stated that was correct, but he proposed putting the two story detail with an upper arch window even where he could not place a window below. Chairman McNiel was not sure the addition of an upper arch window would be an improvement over the two pop-outs presently shown. He felt the two pop-outs break up the field better. Commissioner Melcher suggested that the Commission approve the project and refer the matter back to the Design Review Committee. Mr. Smith indicated they could add windows to the pop-out areas as they are in bedroom areas. Commissioner Vallette indicated she also would like the matter referred back to Design Review. Commissioner Chitlea felt that if the windows could be made real windows, that would take care of the concern. Commissioner Vallette recalled there had been discussion at the Design Review Committee meeting that glass could not be used. Mr. Smith indicated there had been discussions that they would prefer not to add more glass because of Title 24 energy restrictions. He said they would work around the problem and it would be a functioning window. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a negative declaration and adopt the resolution approving Tentative Tract 14208 with modification to require that the two pop-outs on all end elevations include windows. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -6- June 10, 1992 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried , , , , , ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 89-07 - SOUTHWEST DESIGN GROUP - A request to amend the Development Districts Map from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) for 5 acres of land located on the north side of Base Line Road, west of Alta Cuesta Drive - APN: 202-025-01, 4, 7, 8, 12, 13, and 14. Related Files: Tentative Tract 14208 and Tree Removal Permit 91-40· Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration· Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Melcher asked if there would be any way to tie the amendment to Tentative Tract 14208, so that the amendment would become void if the project were not built. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated it could not because general zoning is a policy issue of the City whereas the project itself is subject to action by the developer. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. He asked about the small piece of land to the east of the applicant's project. Alan Smith, Southwest Design Group, 8632 Archibald Avenue, #201, Rancho Cucamonga, said the land belongs to someone else. He indicated the owner had purchased that sliver of land and tried to purchase the remainder of the site which is now owned by the applicant. He said they had master planned the area so that one entire development could be built. He said he did not know if they had any current plans to develop, but the remainder parcel is not land locked and future access would be provided through this site. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Chitlea, to recommend issuance of a negative declaration and adopt the resolution recommending approval of Development District Amendment 89-07. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried , , , , Planning Commission Minutes -7- June 10, 1992 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no additional public comments. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Vallette, unanimously carried, adjourn. 8:24 p.m. - The Planning Commission adjourned. Respectfully eubmitted, Otto Kroutil Deputy Secretary to Planning Commission Minutes -8- June 10, 1992