Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989/09/21 - Agenda Packet CITY OFRANCHOCUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: September 25, 1989 ACTION CO!~ENTS ~ TO: Comnercial/Industrial ~ Design Review Committee Suzanne Chitiea Peter Tolstoy Dan Coleman Betsy Weinberger {Alternate} FROM: Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 21~ 1989 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 (Bruce) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88- 18 - DIVERSIFIED A request to modify a previously approved master plan removing two building pads for the development of a fast food restaurant pad in the Neighborhood Commercial District on the northeast corner of Haven and Highland Avenues - APN: 201-271-58. 6:30 - 7:00 (Bruce) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-49 - AJA/BENNETT - The development of 40 acres of Industrial Master Plan consisting of 18 lots in the General Industrial District (Subarea 5} located at the west side of Hermosa Avenue south of 22nd Street - APN: 209-211-30, 31, 17 and 13. DESIGN REVIEW AGENDA SEPTEMBER 21, 1989 Page 2 7:00 - 7:30 (Steve H.) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-07 - GILBERT AJA - The development of three industrial buildings totaling 116,150 square feet on 6.06 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located south of 6th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue - APN: 229-263-22. 7:30 - 8:00 (Steve H.) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-14 - AMPAC The development of two manufacturing buildings totaling 24,400 square feet on 39.3 acres of land in the Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 15) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at 12167 Arrow Route APN: 229-121-15. 8:00 - 8:30 (Bev/Dan) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-21 - GREAT WESTERN HOTELS The development of a 6 story hotel totaling approximately 107,811 square feet on 2.5 acres of land at the corner of White Oak and Spruce in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan - APN: 208-352-31. 8:30 - 9:00 (Vince) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-20 - GRACE RESTAURANT COMPANY - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for a 6,100 square foot restaurant within an existing commercial shopping center in Terra Vista Planned Community located on the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Base Line Road APN: 1076-~1-31. BA:mlg Attachments cc: Planning Commission/City Council COI(4ERCIAL/INI)USTRIAL CONSENT CALENDAR ITEHS AGENDA September 21, 1989 1. DR 88-04 - CARNEY ARCHITECTS (Bruce) Review of proposed paving materials and colors. Committee Action: The Committee (Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tolstoy and Dan Coleman) recommended that the proposed retarded natural concrete finish be used for the sidewalks instead of the broom finish concrete and that the applicant submit another sample paving material finish for the plaza and enriched paving areas across drive isles. 2. DR 87-19 - LENNON ARCHITECTS (Tom) Review revised building elevations. Committee Action: The Committee did not approve the revised building elevations and recommended the project return to the Committee with the following revisions: 1. Remove the dark green paint in the triangular pattern. These areas should be painted gray. 2. The accent band at the mid-point of the building elevation should be painted green. 3. The columns at the building entrance should be painted green. 4. The vertical elements at the building entrance should be painted green. 3. TRACT 13886 & CUP 88-01 - BARHAKIAN {Bev) Review of roof material. Committee Action: The Committee (Chitiea, Tolstoy, Coleman) approved the use of "Aged Cedar" Duralite tile for the condominium and commercial project. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Bruce September 21, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-18 - DIVERSIFIED - A request to modify a previously approved master plan removing two building pads for the development of a fast food restaurant pad in the Neighborhood Commercial District on the northeast corner of Haven and Highland Avenues - APN: 201-271-58. Background: This project to develop a McDonalds restaurant on two existing pads within the Haven Village Shopping Center was originally intended to be processed with a separate application DR 88-10 for the commercial/retail development of two remaining pads. However, the applicants have chosen to process the application for the McDonalds restaurant separately. On August 18, 1988, the Design Review Committee examined the conceptual site plans for the proposed restaurant. Since that time, plans have been developed addressing the Committee's concerns: 1. The drive aisle has been screened from view in a manner consistent with the adopted policies for drive-thru facilities. 2. The drive-thru has been completely screened from view from Haven Avenue through building orientation, trellis work and landscaping. Staff ~nm~M)nts: Following are comments generated from a recent staff review of the site plans and building elevations of the proposed restaurant: Site Plan: 1. The site design should minimize pedestrian - vehicular conflicts. 2. The placement of the building should facilitate pedestrian space and the drive-thru. 3. The drive-thru lane should be screened with the use of a combination of low screen wall, heavy landscaping and trellis work. 4. The planter area adjacent to the north side of the drive-thru should be increased in width and additional screening plants provided. 5. Enriched paving should be provided at the handicapped ramps with additional enriched paving across the drive aisle linking the handicapped stalls with the walk at the north side of the building. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 88-18 - DIVERSIFIED Page 2 6. Pedestrian connections from other parts of the shopping center should be completed to the subject site with matching enriched paving. Elevations: 1. The buildings should match the materials and colors of existing construction and emulate existing building designs within the center. 2. The parapet on the west building elevation appears to be designed for the signage instead of the signage being designed to the building. Design Review ComaStree Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tolstoy, and Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Bruce Abbott The Design Review Co~ittee reviewed proposed plans and elevations for the McDonalds Restaurant and recommended that the following revisions be made: 1. The staining scheme should be reversed with the trim being the darker stain and the siding receiving a light stain. 2. The vertical distance (height) of the parapet above the roof should be reduced and the surface area of the roof increased outside the parapet. 3. The tower should be square in shape and the windows on the east and west sides of the tower should be repeated on the north and south sides. This would cause the arch symbols to be deleted from the north and south sides of the tower. 4. Split columns should be used around the entire building. 5. Service doors at the south side should retain the light stain in order to blend with the siding. 6. The height of the letters on the signage should be reduced to a maximum height of 18 inches. The arch symbols should be proportionally reduced in size. 7. Bay window(s) with spandrel glass should be incorporated on the east side of the south elevation and an additional non-bay window with spandrel glass should be added to the west of the service doors on the south side of the building. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 88-18 - DIVERSIFIED Page 3 8. Existing proposed windows should be substituted with bay windows with exception of the windows flanking the doors. 9. The building facade below the bay windows should be extended from the bottom of the windows to the ground plane. Site Plan: 1. A walk should be provided from the sidewalk adjacent to Haven Avenue to the building entrance by the plaza. 2. The plaza paving should be identified on the plans to be brick banding with the "enhanced paving" to match similarly used paving on the rest of the center. 3. Enriched paving should be used to define a "pedestrian path" across the northerly ends at the drive~thru isles and loading isle, utilizing the same paving as proposed for the plaza. 4. Durable, i.e., concrete, benches and tables can be provided on the outdoor plaza to offset a reduction in indoor seating with the introduction of an indoor play area. 5. A 3 foot wide concrete walk and a 2 foot wide planter with a metal fence to match the existing metal site fencing should be added at the planter area bordering the east side of the drive-thru lane entrance. 6. The north-south circulation spine drive should be aligned to provide either a 90 degree "T" intersection or smoother curve at the northeast corner of the site. The applicant should provide alternative designs for this area showing modifications in parking and planter areas for each alternative. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Bruce September 21, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-49 - AJA/BENNET~ - The development of 40 acres of Industrial Master Plan consisting of 18 lots in the General Industrial District (Subarea 5) located at the west side of Hermosa Avenue south of 22nd Street - APN: 209-211-30, 31, 17 and 13. B ackg round: On September 7, 1989, the Design Review Committee examined the revised plans for the proposed master plan and determined that the plans met those revisions as recommended du ring the April 20, 1989 meeting. Also on Septe~er 7, 1989, the Committee reviewed the Design Guidelines for the proposed master plan utilizing the Design Guidelines for Bixby Business Park as an example. The Committee determined that additional text, revised page layout, and revisions to the existing text should be provided according to Planning Division requirements. Additional and revised graphics were also recommended as follows: 1. Master site plan indicating conceptual use of the proposed Building Color Palette so that no calico color effect occurs, adjoining building colors blend well and that a complimentary conceptual color mix occurs. 2. Photos or refined sketches of consistent building styles showing: a cohesive direction for linear or vertical building design, glass, colors, building geometry and building massing. 3. Sketches including a plan view of monument signs indicating geometrical planting scheme, a closer tie with architecture (form/color) and a 24 square foot sign area. The Design Review Committee recommended that the Design Guidelines be reviewed as a full item at the next meeting. Staff Comments: The applicant has resubmitted the revised Design Guidelines as requested. The Committee should examine the Design Guidelines in order to determine if the recommendations for revisions and additional information have been satisfactorily completed. Staff feels that the Design Guidelines have been greatly clarified through revised text and additional graphics. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tolstoy, and Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Bruce Abbott DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-49 - AJA/BENNETT Page 2 The Design Review Committee reviewed the Design Guidelines and recommended that the followin~ revisions be made: Architecture: 1. Remove stepped accent colors. 2. Remove stepped glazing. 3. Provide punched windows as alternative treatment. 4. Remove bright colors. 5. Use square or triangular columns instead of round columns. 6. Scale color palette down by removing column number 3 accent colors blue through green on page 63. 7. Modify the accent color site plan to remove those colors indicated in number 6. 8. Indicate how the glazin9 will be used with building accent colors in conjunction with the building accent color master plan. 9. Indicate on sketches how glass will be used to project above the parapet. 10. Introduce a texture treatment to facades, for example, a light sandblast finish. Signs/Landscape: 1. Indicate two rows of vertical accent trees behind the monument sign on the plan view and perspective sketch. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Steve H. September 21, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-07 - GILBERT AJA - The development of three industrial buildings totaling 116,150 square feet on 6.06 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located south of 6th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue - APN: 229-263-22. Background: This project is within the Mission Business Center. A master plan DR 88-20) for Mission Business Center was approved on September 14, 1988. On August 3, 1989, this item was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (McNiel, Weinberger, Coleman). Approval was not recommended due to a lack of any variation of form and detailed articulation to the buildings. The Design Review Committee (Chitiea, Tolstoy, Coleman), reviewed revised building elevations on August 17, 1989. The Committee did not recommend approval of the revised renderings because they felt the new drawings did not address the Committees' concerns adequately. Staff Coments: This project has again been scheduled as a full item before the Design Review Committee to allow the applicant and the Committee to work out design concerns in person. The following issues should be discussed in relation to the revised plans: 1. Provide spandrel glass in areas visible from the streets. Also, spandrel glass should wrap around to the side elevations of the building. 2. The building entrances should be altered or angled to avoid a "fixed" design. 3. The building walls need to be articulated to help vary the building form and provide visual interest especially in areas visible from streets. 4. The use of reflective glass as an accent element to the building, in particular to accent the entrances. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tolstoy, and Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Steve Hayes DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 89-07 - GILBERT AJA Page 2 The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project subject to the following conditions: 1. A semi-reflective glass shall be used on all second story windows throughout the project. 2. Pop-out slot windows shall be added to the building in the following locations: a. The southern most panel of the west elevation of Building 3. b. The western most panel and a half of the south elevation of Building 5. 3. Additional semi-reflective glass shall be utilized above the entrance on the east side of Building 3. 4. A revised material sample board including samples of the new semi- reflective glass shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:00 Steve H. September 21, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-14 - AMPAC - The development of two manufacturing buildings totaling 24,400 square feet on 39.3 acres of land in the Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 15) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at 12167 Arrow Route - APN: 229-121-15. Background: This project was originally reviewed by the Design Review Committee (McNiel, Weinberger, Coleman) on August, 3 1989. The Committee did not recommend approval of the plans at that time and requested that the applicant revise the landscape plan and building elevations and return to the Committee for further review. Staff Comnents: The following items of concern from the August 3rd meeting should be discussed in relation to the revised plans. Landscape: 1. Landscaped planters with radius curves should be provided along the dry cast building perimeter wherever possible. The palette within the planter should include evergreen shrubs and annual color of low profile. The planters and palette should be indicated on the conceptual landscape plan, site plan, and building elevations. 2. Due to the need of a possible on-site detention basin, a section of perimeter landscaping has been eliminated along the south property line. Therefore, additional trees should be located somewhere else on the project site to make up for the deficit. Architecture: 1. The applicant has provided four (4) new schemes for the proposed dry cast building which will be posted at the September 21st meeting. Overall, the building footprints and color schemes do not exhibit as much of a pre-engineered look and elements such as concrete bases, varying textures and overhangs have been provided. Design Review Conmittee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, David Blakesley, and Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Steve Hayes DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 89-14 - AMPAC Page 2 The Design Review Committee did not recommend approval of the proposed architectural elevations and that revised elevations be brought back for further review with the following modifications: 1. The mansard material shall be of a soft g ray color. 2. The mansard overhang shall be reduced in pitch as to appear as a less obstrusive element to the building. 3. The southwest portion of the building shall be upgraded to include, but not limited to, different varieties of materials and/or colors, and a variation of roof height as seen from the Devore Freeway. 4. An additional landscaped area shall be added along the southern boundary of the project site. The design of the planters and locations of trees shall take into account the permanent drainage facilities that are required to have the site drain properly to the future Day Creek Flood Control Channel. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 - 8:30 Bev/Dan September 21, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-21 - GREAT WESTERN HOTELS The development of a 6 story hotel totaling approximately I'~1 square feet on 2.5 acres of land at the corner of White Oak and Spruce in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan - APN: 208-352-31. Staff Comments: Preliminary review of architectural concept for the proposed hotel. Design Review Comnittee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tolstoy, and Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Beverly Nissen The Committee (Chitlea, Tolstoy, Coleman) reviewed the project and gave their initial suggestions and feedback. The applicant should make the following changes and resubmit the project: 1. More articulation and movement should be provided on the front elevation. 2. The tower element should be more substantial and dominant with more mass. 3. The elevation facing White Oak Avenue should be upgraded. It was felt that a focal point is needed. 4. An enlarged detail of a typical window treatment should be provided. 5. Window treatment at the street level should be enhanced. 6. The wall around the pool should be softened with landscaping. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:30 - 9:00 Vince September 21, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-20 - GRACE RESTAURANT COMPANY - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for a 6,100 square foot restaurant within an existing commercial shopping center in Terra Vista Planned Community located on the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Base Line Road - APN: 1076-481-31. Background: This is the last freestanding pad in the Terra Vista Village to be submitted for design review. Coco's Restaurant is scheduled to be the tenant. The Committee (Chitiea, Tolstoy, Coleman) reviewed the project at the September 7, 1989 meeting and did not recommend approval. Staff Comnents: The Committee should review plans for the proposed restaurant for completion of revisions as recommended at the September 7, 1989 meeting as follows: 1. Decorative panel doors should be used on the south and west elevations. 2. Field tile insets should be added to the south and west elevations. 3. The service entrance should be screened by a 4 foot wall with planters using Burger King to the north as an example. 4. The wall adjacent to the entrance should be enhanced with an architectural element(s) such as the quadrafoils used in the center. 5. The Cantera columns should be brought around to the north elevation or spandrel glass should be used as a window element. 6. The parapet finish should be stucco on the north elevation. 7. The mission style wing wall should be used at the west terminus of the greenhouse on the north elevation. 8. The greenhouse element style should be less contemporary, such as the greenhouse at the Edwards Mansion in Redlands. 9. Use a rust color on cornice to match the rest of the center. 10. Spanish style tile accents should match the rest of the center. 11. Delete landscaping on revised building elevations. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 89-20 - GRACE RESTAURANT Page 2 Design Review Comittee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tolstoy, and Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Vince Bertoni The Committee recommended approval of the revised elevations as submitted on September 21, 1898 subject to the following conditions: 1. A Tetra Cotta element similar to those found in the rest of the center within the inset areas should be used in lieu of the tile. 2. The architectural details, elements, and the materials/colors used must be consistent with the existing center.