Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989/07/20 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: July 24, 1989 ACTION COMMENTS TO: Conmnercial/Industrial 1977 Design Review Committee Suzanne Chitlea Peter Tolstoy Dan Coleman Betsy Weinberger {Alternate) FROM: Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF JULY 20~ 198g The following is a description of projects which require review and rating by the Design Review Committee. Please review the attached plans, visit the project sites, and write down your comments using the blank space provided under each project on the attached sheets. After the meeting, the consensus of the Committee's concerns will be typed up as the formal action/recommendation of the Committee and distributed to the Commission and Council. As always, feel free to contact the appropriate project manager (noted in parentheses along the left margin), prior to the meeting date, if you have specific questions related to the scheduled projects. Dinner will be provided between 5:00 - 5:30 p.m., Consent Calendar items will be reviewed between 5:30 p.m. - 6:00 p.m., with the first design review item being heard at 6:00 p.m. Please notify our department if you will be unable to attend the meeting, or if you will be late, so that the dinner can be properly ordered and the necessary arrangements made. 6:00 - 6:30 (Tom) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-41 - WOLFF/LANG/CHRISTOPHER - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for two office buildings totaling 63,597 square feet on 1.65 acres of land in the General Commercial District located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN: 1077-661-04 and 09. DESIGN REVIEW AGENDA JULY 20, 1989 Page 2 6:30 - 7:00 (Bruce) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-06 - J.P. TECHNOLOGIES - The development of a research and development building totaling 40,000 square feet on 4.86 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) located on the north side of Elm Avenue at Maple Avenue. APN: Related Files: PR 89-13 and DR 86-23 Modification. 7:00 - 7:30 (Brett) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-16 - CHILI'S ~ The development of a restaurant totaling 5,995 square feet within an approved integratea community shopping center consisting of four major retail buildings and adjoining mall shops, nine satellite retail buildings and two satellite office buildings, four restaurant pads, a theater, and a design center approved in concept. All on 71 acres of land in the Community Commercial District of the Terra Vista Planned Community located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard - APN: 1077-421-05, 06, and 13. 8:00 (Cindy) REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCF - A Planning Commission workshop for the City's proposed Hillside Development Ordinance. BA:mlg Attachments cc: Planning Commission/City Council COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENDA July 20, 1989 1. DR 8g-13 (NORDIC) (Steve R.) Review revised elevations and proposed colors for painted handrails. Committee Action: The Committee approved the accent color for the railing as well as architectural changes to the stairway. The Committee stated that the Planning Commission would not approve the project unless a detailed employee lunch area is shown. In addition, the Committee is requiring additional shade trees for the lawn adjacent to the parking areas. 2. DR 87-59 (DELMAR ENTERPRISES) (Bruce) Review color modifications for painted metal handrails and tower roof. Committee Action The Committee recommended that the metal handrail be painted the light green (aqua) color as originally approved to tie in with the color of the on-site tower roof and the windows on the project to the east. 3. DR 88-04 (CARNEY ARCHITECTS) (Bruce) Review building materials and colors for the Haven Corporate Center Master Plan. Committee Action: The Committee recommended that the materials and colors for the entire Master Plan be reviewed with the conceptual building designs as they are submitted for Development Review. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENDA COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL Page 2, 1989 4. CUP 88-12 (WESTERN PROPERTIES) (Dan) Review of minor building revisions. Committee Action: Additional decorative elements (e.g., lighting sconces) should be provided within the vestibule. The parapet design sheathed in metal siding material, painted to match the building, was approved subject to providing a heavier cornice detail. The plan changes affecting the building envelope were approved. 5. cup aS-Z9 (RUBY) (Bey} Review color modification for Plaza De Las Brisas. Committee Action: (Chitiea, Weinberger, Coleman), the Committee did not approve the colors as proposed. They directed staff to recommend to the applicant that subtle hues be used. The applicant should provide alternative colors for Committee review. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Tom July 20, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-41 WOLFF/LANG/CHRISTOPHER The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for two office buildings totaling 63,597 square feet on 1.65 acres of land in the General Commercial District located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN: 1077- 661-04 and 09. Background: The Vir9inia Dare Business Center has an established architectural theme that is characteristic of the winery/mission style. All buildings within the center have common architectural elements that carry out the overall program. The applicants current proposal is to develop the two remainin9 vacant sites within the center. First, a single-story office building has been proposed directly south of Del Taco, and second, a three-story office building has been proposed directly south of the cinema. Staff Co~m~ents: Architecture: The proposed building elevations are in keeping with the existing architectural design regarding materials, finish, and color. Site Plan: The major elements of the site plan have been established through previous master and site plan approvals. The only suggestion for improvement on the site design at this time is to provide additional pedestrian connections and freestanding trellises for a consistent link between the proposed and existing buildings. Landscaping: 1. The planter area at the northeast corner of the three-story building should be designed to a height and width that would allow for comfortable seating. 2. The sidewalk connecting parking areas at the northwest corner of the three-story building should be increased in width. 3. Trees adjacent to buildings should be planted in areas of public view at a rate of (1} tree per 30 lineal feet of building. 4. Within parking lots, trees should be planted at a rate of one (1} tree for every three (3) parkings stalls which is determined by dividing 3 into the total number of stalls. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 88-41 - WOLFF/LANG/CHRISTOPHER Page 2 Design Review Comittee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Betsy Weinberger, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Tom Grahn The Committee reviewed the project, but did not recommend approval due to the following concerns and/or comments. 1. Pedestrian connections should be provided to link the three-story building with the theater. The enhanced paving, consistent with what currently exists in the center, should be coordinated to align with the handicapped access ramp and should be striped accordingly. 2. Three (3) landscape fingers should be provided along the west elevation of the three-story buildings. 3. One (1) tree pocket and two (2) vine pockets should be added to the north elevation of the three-story building. 4. Additional trees should be added to the south elevation of the three-story building. 5. Vines should be planted along the west elevation of the single- story building. 6. Additional architectural enhancement should be provided on the east elevation of the single-story building. 7. The interior courtyard of the three-story building should be secured. A possible method would be to install a wrought iron gate at both entrances. The applicant was directed to return to the Committee to show a consistency of proposed architectural elements. This item will not be rescheduled for the Committee until the revised parking study has been approved by the Planning Commission. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Bruce July 20, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-06 - J.P. TECHNOLOGIES - The development of a research and development building totaling 40,000 square feet on 4.86 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) located on the north side of Elm Avenue at Maple Avenue. APN: Related Files: PR 89-13 and DR 86-23 Modification. Staff Co~ents: The architect and staff reviewed the project on April 19, 1989, in order to clarify certain design issues. The Design Review Committee (Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman) examined plans for the proposed project on June 8, 1989 and recommended certain revisions and additional information be provided and that revised plans be resubmitted as a full review item. The Committees recommendations have been addressed with the exception that: 1. Alternate window shade structure materials have not been provided. The applicant is proposing metal shade structures. 2. "Wing" walls as opposed to columns are still being used to support the shade structures. 3. No graphic descriptions of project lighting have been provided with the exception a bollard light. 4. Revised landscape plans indicate that the native California Fan Palm has not been used. Staff feels strongly that this palm would provide a more appropriately scaled building accent tree for the project compared to Mexican Fan Palm. The proposed building accent tree is a sky line tree reaching heights well over 100 feet which works well against high rise buildings but is out of scale when used to accent a single story building. The California Fan Palm would also better fit the applicants theme of use of native materials for the project. Revised plans should address the following concerns and comments given to the applicant: Architecture: 1. Alternative window shade structure should be explored. A round shape may be appropriate. Also, metal could be utilized, however, other materials should be explored. 2. Freestanding columns should be used to support the shading structure, rather than the proposed "wing" wall against the main wall of the structure. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 89-06 - J.P. TECHNOLOGIES Page 2 3. The basic form of the windows may be appropriate, however, the tile around the windows should be substituted with the same elements of stripes and squares located around the entrance of the building. 4. The building parapet should be stepped and each vertical set of reveals should culminate at the stepped parapet with an element which continues over the vertical reveal flush with the top edge of the building parapet. Alternative spacing of vertical reveals should be explored. 5. A different color(s) should be proposed for the project and a new material and color board resubmitted for review. Site Plan: 1. The employee plaza space should be moved further away from the street area to reduce the amount of noise and pollution for users. 2. Details of storage area, screen walls, coverings and trash enclosure should be provided to clarify durability and a desired connection with the architecture. 3. The sidewalk at the middle of the west side of the eastern most parking lot, needs to make a connection with sidewalks to the west or be deleted as it goes nowhere now. 4. The sidewalk at the southwest corner of the eastern most parking lot would provide a much more pleasurable experience if it were located away from the building, meandering across the landscape between berms to the employee plaza. 5. The sidewalk adjacent to Elm Avenue should meander more. 6. Project lighting details should be provided including utilization of different types of lighting fixtures such as walk lights, bollard lights, wall lights, step lights and planting flood lights. 7. Entry monument signs should be provided which tie in with the building architecture. Landscape: 1. Provide a description of existing plant material on adjacent properties to the west and the north. 2. Pinus halapensis should be changed to Pinus eldarica (Mondell Pine) which has a pryamidal shape, helping to unify the site through repetition of similar tree forms such as Liquidambar and Brachychiton. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 89-06 - J.P. TECHNOLOGIES Page 3 3. A stronger project entry statement tree should be provided. However, Cupania should remain as the parking lot and lunch area shade tree. 4. The turf areas should be reduced in size for purposes of water conservation. An ideal amount would be not more than 25% of landscaping devoted to turf. 5. The native palm, Washingtonia filifera should be used as the building accent tree. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Betsy Weinberger, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Bruce Abbott The Design Review Committee examined the revised plans and exhibits and confirmed that the following items, as indicated by staff, had not been addressed satisfactorily. 1. Alternate window shade structures/materials. 2. "Wing walls" as opposed to free standing columns to support the shade structures. 3. Graphic descriptions of project lighting with the exception of a bollard light at the entrance. 4. California Fan Palm as the building accent tree instead of the Mexican Fan Palm. The first will provide an accent tree in scale with the building as well as providing plant material that is in keeping with the design concept of using native material. The Committee felt that the revisions to the building did not satisfactorily change the industrial/institutional appearance of the building nor did the style of the building elevations provide an appearance that would fit the context of the surrounding area. The Committee directed the applicant to revise drawings for the building. Staff was directed to work with the architect to provide examples of buildings and architectural elements which would help in the development of new conceptual building elevations. A workshop could be arranged if necessary to provide ideas and assist the applicant in revising plans. The applicant should resubmit for Design Review Committee action after the revised elevations have been reviewed and approved by staff. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Brett July 20, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-16 - CHILI'S - The development of a restaurant totaling 5,995 square feet within an approved integrated con~nunity shopping center consisting of four major retail buildings and adjoining mall shops, nine satellite retail buildings and two satellite office buildings, four restaurant pads, a theater, and a design center approved in concept. All on 71 acres of land in the Community Commercial District of the Terra Vista Planned Community located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard - APN: 1077-421-05, 06, and 13. Background: The restaurant is the first satellite pad to be submitted for development within the Terra Vista Town Center. The restaurant will be located on the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and the western secondary drive aisle. Staff Comments: Site Plan: 1. The applicant should Consider orienting the entrance to the parking area to the west. 2. The pedestrian promenade to the west of the site should be continued north of Chili's. The same level of detailing and special paving should be provided. 3. A pedestrian connection should be provided between the restaurant and northerly parking lot (across service drive). Landscaping: 1. Additional tree plantings should be provided. Architecture: 1. A strong relationship to Town Center architecture should be provided by incorporating such items as a small tower element, varying the roof structure and parapet height, and/or using details prevalent in the Town Center structures. 2. The rear elevation should be architecturally upgraded. Signs: 1. Size and location of signs in relation to the signage of the rest of the center should be considered. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 89-16 - CHILI'S Page 2 Design Review Committee A~tion: Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Betsy Weinberger, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Brett Homer The Conmnittee did not approve the project as proposed. The following items should be addressed by the applicant in revised plans for additional Committee review: 1. The two proposed wall signs should be substantially reduced in size. The Committee recommended the elimination of one of the signs for a total of two signs as permitted by the Town Center Sign program. 2. A trellis structure or similar detail should be added where the signs will be removed. Special paving and landscaping should be provided as well. 3. A hip roof element or tower should be provided to accent the front facade and restaurant entry. Parapet heights may also be altered. 4. The cap detail should be revised to be consistent with the Town Center architecture in terms of color and form. 5. Outdoor seating, consistent with the Town Center site furniture, should be provided outside the building entry. 6. The promenade walk treatment should be continued along the north face of the restaurant. Special paving treatment should also be provided across the service drive. 7. The roof screening should be consistent with the building color and material. 8. The rear elevation should be enhanced by providing details consistent with the screen wall and special treatment just south of the promenade. 9. The awning color and design should be considered by the full Commission. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: July 20, 1989 1977 TO: Planning Commissioners FROM:~/j~Larry Henderson, Principal Planner BY: Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: WORKSHOP FOR THE HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE The Hillside Development Ordinance has been revised as a result of comments from the previous Planning Commission workshop on June 22, 1989 and further staff review. A copy of the Planning Commission minutes from the last meet.ing has been attached for your information. Areas of significant concern which have been revised in the document include the following: 1. A definition has been added for the terms "Prominent Ridge" and "Scar"~ 2. Development is to be prohibited on slopes 30 percent or greater. 3. Guideline statements have been added to encourage preservation of views and to discourage overbuilding on a lot. 4. Standards have been added to require 360 degree architectural treatment, front and street side yard landscapin9 and to minimize the amount of turf or grass planted along a street front. 5. Procedures have been added to the Transfer of Development Ri9hts section requirin9 a Development Agreement, General Plan Amendment, and Specific Plan. Also, a Preliminary Site Review of the donor parcel will be required to determine the actual number of credits which may be transferred as well as a cost analysis for the eventual open space maintenance. LH:CN:mlg CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting June 22, 1989 Hillside Development Ordinance Workshop Chairman Larry McNiel called the special workshop to order at 8:30 P.M. at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 Arrow Hi9hway, Rancho Cucamonga. Rol 1 Cal 1 COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Larry McNiel ~ Peter Tolstoy STAFF PRESENT: Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner; Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Jeff Gravel, Assistant Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, Larry Henderson, Senior Planner; Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner Cindy Norris gave an oral presentation describing the proposed Hillside Development Ordinance. The presentation outlined the purpose for the ordinance, proposed review methods, and proposed guidelines and standards, includin9 architecture, roadway design, fencing, density restrictions and transfer of development rights. The general response by the Planning Commission was favorable. They indicated that the Ordinance as presented was comprehensive; however, the Commission recommended that the followin9 be revised. 1. The development should be restricted from any prominent ridgeline and the term "prominent ridgeline" be clearly defined. 2. All development should be prohibited from slopes which are 30 percent or greater. 3. Wording should be added to slope zone 2, (5 to 7.99 percent., to state padding of a lot may be limited, split level architecture may be required subject to design review, and the criteria for 18 inch maximum split be eliminated. 4. The design criteria and graphics in Section 17.06.100 G.8 should be revised to insure that an improved, concrete channel be provided in any open drainage system along with any naturalizing treatment. It was also suggested that provisions may be added to allow for consideration of cross lot drainage on a larger scale if necessary to reduce on-site grading. 5. Language should be added to the document in reference to graphic number 10, to insure that pole foundations will not be visually disruptive where used. 6. The section' on the amount of window area for a structure facing a downhill slope contained in Section 17.06.100 4.f.2 should be eliminated. 7. Section I7.06.100I on Transfer of Development Rights should be significantly revised to add further standards and restrictions to the procedure. If possible, the City may want to designate appropriate donor or receiver parcels, or both, through a Development Agreement and/or Specific Plan process. 8. The idea or word "scar" should be added to the purpose and intent section and a definition for the term should be provided. 9. The idea or terms "wildlife conservation" and "water conservation" should be added to the purpose and intent section. The Planning Commission decided to continue the workshop to a future date. ADJOURNMENT' The workshop adjourned at 10:10 P.M. Respectful ly submitted, Brad Buller Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -2- June 22, 1989 COte4ERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENDA AUGUST 3, 1989 1. CUP 89-35 - HUGHES) (Steve H.) Discussion of maximum storefront width for signs. Committee Action: 2. CUP 85-19 - RUBY) {Bev} Review proposed colors. Committee Action: