HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992/04/02 - Workshop Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
April 2, 1992
Chairman Larry McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 5:15 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:
STAFF PRESENT:
PRESENT:
Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy, John Melcher,
Suzanne Chitiea, Steve Preston, HPC
Brad Buller, City Planner; Scott Murphy, Associate
Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Otto Kroutil, Deputy
City Planner; Bey Nissen, Associate Planner; Anthea
Hartig, Associate Planner; Larry Henderson, Principal
Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Shintu Bose,
Deputy City Engineer; Joe O'Neil, City Engineer; Barbara
Krall, Assistant Engineer; Dan James, Senior Civil
Engineer; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer
APPLICANTS: PRESENT:
Prescott Muir, Prescott Muir Architects;
Lisa Arnett, Prescott Muir Architects;
Brett French, Environs Landscape
Architecture; Joseph Meyer, C.B.
Commercial
REVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL PLANS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A SHOPPING CENTER, LOCATED AT
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND VINEYARD AVENUE PRE-APPLICATION
REVIEW 92-02 - SMITH'S SUPERSTORE
Mr. Prescott Muir presented revised architectural plans to the Commission and
commented on the proposal.
Ms. Beverly Nissen presented staff's comments to the Commission.
The Commission responded to the proposal as follows:
Commissioner Melcher indicated that this process was not intended for the
Commission to receive new information and it would be difficult for him to
comment on the revised elevations. He felt that the original drawings were
difficult to decipher because of their size and scale. He liked the fact that
the building was "dug in" on the north side. He felt this would help reduce
the scale of the building. He felt that the lack of satellite pads at the
corner was not an issue and that master planning with the out parcel to the
north was appropriate. He felt that the urbanity of the Activity Center needs
to be addressed and at first blush he preferred the alternate landscape plan
rather than what was originally proposed. He felt that the overhead doors
were enormous and needed to be addressed. He felt that allowing the
architecture to reflect the winery or still building on the east side of
Foothill Boulevard was appropriate, but that the building should not reflect
the architecture of the winery shopping center.
Commissioner Tolstoy indicated he felt the Activity Center as proposed did not
meet the intent of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. He reflected on the
reason why no buildings required on the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard
and Vineyard Avenue and only this corner was different and buildings should be
required. He also felt the site should be more pedestrian oriented and give
the customers the opportunity to do other types of shopping and errands. He
felt the site plan should try and get away from large parking areas exposed to
Foothill Boulevard. He felt that the architecture was hard to comment on
because of the scale of the drawings. He felt that the building did not fit
his idea of what a shopping center should look like.
Commissioner Chitiea shared the site plan concerns of Commissioner Tolstoy.
She felt the site was too small to accommodate such a large building. She
felt that the convenience to the consumer was not present without additional
shops. She felt the building facade needed greater articulation. She felt it
would be hard, however, to place a building of this size adjacent to the
street frontage. She felt that the building facade needed more movement and
that change was needed in the roof plane. She felt that the orientation of
the loading area was a problem. She preferred the revised landscape concept
with the water element at the corner. She felt more landscaping against the
building should be provided.
Commissioner McNiel commented that he had never seen a building this large for
a grocery store.
Mr. Prescott Muir responded that the concept behind the Smith's Superstore was
to take a typical shopping center and introvert it so that all the ancillary
services are provided in the interior of the building. Yogurt stores, video
rental, and pizza parlors will be run by concessionaires.
Commissioner McNiel indicated that he agreed with the location of the Activity
Center. He felt it was important to master plan the out parcel. He indicated
that it was a policy of the Planning Commission not to expose roll-up doors to
a public street. He felt that the walkway through the center of the site
would be difficult to push a grocery cart through and that it should be
expanded. He felt that the specialized paving in front of the store served no
purpose unless it lined up with the entry doors. He felt that the roof line
needed greater articulation and that equipment screening should be integrated
with the architecture of the building. He did not like the standing seamed
metal roof and felt a different roof material would be more appropriate. He
felt that the exterior of the building should be treated as though it were a
Planning Commission Minutes -2- April 2, 1992
shopping center. He felt that the corner treatment should reflect the local
winery heritage also. His biggest concern was the creation of pedestrian
access that made sense. He felt that the applicant should explore moving pads
A and B to the corner to create an Activity Center and possibly reorient the
building. He felt that the use was appropriate.
Commissioner Tolstoy indicated that he would welcome a new architectural look
in the City and did not mind departing from the traditional Mediterranean
style, but that any new theme must have the same level of detail as is common
throughout the City.
Commissioner Melcher thought that the form of the building should express the
fact that so much is happening inside the building. He stated he was
disappointed with the mechanical screening concept. He stated that the lines
of the penthouse should not be discernible as a penthouse. He thought that
the applicant should explore reducing the drive aisles to 24 feet in width.
He had no objection to the proposed metal roof.
Commissioner Chitiea indicated the applicant should not use any industrial
materials. She did not like the use of split face block especially when mixed
with stucco and rock. She felt the entry point at the corner should be of
quality materials and upscale. She felt the building needed more movement and
interest and that it currently looked like a big box.
Mr. Buller concluded the meeting with the following remarks:
The challenge for the applicant is to fit the 75,000 square foot building
onto the site.
2. The out parcel to the north should be master planned.
Three of the Commissioners were opposed to roll-up doors facing Foothill
Boulevard and one of the Commissioners felt they might be successfully
incorporated into the project if aesthetics and location issues were
considered.
4. Metal roof is not desirable.
The architecture of the project should not reflect that of the winery
shopping center.
Engineering and Historic Preservation concerns were not discussed. The
applicant should consult with the Fire District to determine if the
secondary driveway off Vineyard Avenue could be turf blocked and whether
a majority of the drive isles could be reduced to 24 feet. The Historic
Preservation Commission will consider the project because of the original
Cucamonga Post Office was located on the site.
The applicant should revise the Activity Center concept. Buildings, of
an appropriate scale should be added and sited at the corner.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- April 2, 1992
*****
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 2, 1992