Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994/07/19 - Agenda Packet DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY JULY 19, 1994 5:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Heinz Lumpp John Melcher Dan Coleman Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Larry McNiel Dave Barker CONSENT CALENDAR The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. NO ITEMS HAVE SEEN SUBMITTED PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 5:00 p.m. (Scott) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 94-12 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS - A request to construct a 6,200 square foot, free-standing retail building within a previously approved commercial/retail center in the Regional Related Commercial designation (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 229-031-27. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 5:00 p.m. Scott Murphy July 19, 1994 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 94-12 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS - A request to construct a 6,200 square foot, free-standing retail building within a previously approved commercial/retail center in the Regional Related Commercial designation (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 229-031-27. Background: In August of 1991 , the City Council approved the Master Plan for the Foothill Marketplace project. The Master Plan established the building locations, the approximate building sizes, and parking lot layout for the development. Following Council approval, the Planning Commission conducted numerous workshops on the architectural details proposed for the center. These details were subsequently approved and have been used as the basis for review and approval of a majority of the structures currently under construction in the center. Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to develop a retail building at the southwest corner of the Foothill Boulvard/Etiwanda Avenue intersection. The Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (FBSP) identifies this intersection as an "activity center. " The activity center encourages pedestrian oriented design by allowing building setbacks to be reduced to 25 feet from curb and increasing the parking setback to 45 feet from the curb. With the design submitted, the applicant has designed a building that closely parallels the curb location to take advantage of the 25-foot setback requirement. Staff Cosments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding the project: NOTE: The east and west elevation are incorrectly labeled. 1. A small curved appendage is attached to the building at the northern end of the east elevation reflecting the curve of the curb. This appendage is out of character for the architecture of the project and appears to be an addition to the building rather than an integrated part of the design. This curved appendage should be deleted to provide a consistent arch treatment on both sides of the tower. 2. The introduction of the tower element at the northeast corner of the building creates a focal point at the street intersection. The upper portion of the tower is placed at an awkward 45 degree axis. The mass is overbearing and should be reduced in size or deleted. Staff suggests that the tower without the upper portion is sufficient to create the focal point. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 94-12 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS July 19, 1994 Page 2 3. The arcade along the south elevation should be extended beyond the store front glass area rather than terminating in the middle of the store front. 4. The arcade along the east elevation should extend slightly further to the north, beyond the store front glass, to break up the blank wall. 5. The activity center hardscape treatment should be extended to the building consistent with the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan Design Guidelines. Pavers and formal tree planting should be installed consistent with the existing activity center treatment and the FBSP. 6. The west elevation needs architectural treatment to the northerly portion which is prominently visible to motorists. 7. Stronger architectural features are needed to draw pedestrians onto the site from the street. The public entrance to the building which is presumably at or near the southwest corner. The sidewalk connections shown are token at best. The covered pedestrian colonades should be extended the full length of the west and south elevations and the sidewalk connection provided underneath to present a cooler, more inviting entrance to the pad and the project. Secondary Issues: once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1 . The wainscot treatment should wrap around the entire building, except for window areas. Specifically, it should be used at the southeast corner of the building, along both the south and east elevations. 2. The Foothill/Etiwanda elevation appears to have a parapet above the mansard roof. This parapet is inconsistent with Section A-A and the north elevation. If the parapet is, in fact, above the mansard, the parapet should receive the same cornice treatment as the other parapets on the building. 3. Materials and detailing used on the building should be consistent with those of the center. 4. The roof plan is not consistent with the building elevations. The Foothill/Etiwanda elevation depicts a small tower element at the southeast corner that is enclosed on all four sides. The roof plan, however, does not show this tower. Staff suggests that the tower be provided as shown on the elevation. 5. The roof plan also depicts a small addition at the southeast corner of the building which is not reflected on the elevations. Staff suggests the building be built as shown in the elevations. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 94-12 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS July 19, 1994 Page 3 6. The parapet height along the north elevation (see Section A-A) may not be high enough to screen roof-mounted equipment. Sight line studies should be provided. 7. The site is not consistent with the roof plan or elevations. The site plan shows an indentation at the northwest corner that is not shown on the north or west elevations. B. The site plan also does not accurately reflect the storefront window locations as illustrated in the elevations. Staff Recomendation Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the elevations subject to the conditions listed above. Design Review Co®ittee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Scott Murphy