HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989/10/19 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 23, 1989 ACTION COI~MENTS
TO: Comaercial/Ind~strial
Design Review Committee Suzanne Chitlea
Peter Tolstoy
Dan Coleman
Betsy Weinberger (Alternate)
FROM: Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITFEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 19, 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
(Steve H.) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-08 -
GILBERT AJA The development of two
warehouse/distribution buildings totaling 305,400 square
feet on 15.4 acres of land in the General Industrial
District (Subarea 11}, located south of 6th Street, east
of Pittsburgh Avenue - APN: 229-263-22.
6:30 - 7:00
{Bruce} ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-12 -
DAVIES - The development of Phase II and III including
fo"6'~'F'(4) industrial buildings totaling 18,395 square
feet on 2.46 acres of land in the General Industrial
District (Subarea 3}, located on Feron Boulevard, east
of Helms Avenue - APN: 209-031-87 and 88.
DESIGN REVIEW AGENDA
OCTOBER 19, 1989
Page 2
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 integrated 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
Con~nunity located at the northeast corner of Haven
Avenue and Foothill Boulevard -
APN: 1077-421-05, 06, and 13.
7:30 - 8:00
(Vince) MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-36 A
modification to a previously approved site plan and
building elevations for an industrial
warehouse/manufacturing building totaling 77,757 square
feet on 5.94 acres of land in the minimum Impact Heavy
Industrial designation (Subarea 9) of the Industrial
Specific Plan, located on the south side of Arrow Route
at Milliken Avenue - APN: 229-111-23.
BA:mlg
Attachments
cc: Planning Commission/City Council
COI4~4ERC IAL/INDU~RIAL
CONSENT CAJ_ENO A~Z IIEl4S AX~ENDA
October 19, 1989
1. DR 88-18 - DIVERSIFIEI)
(Bruce) Review revised building elevations and
site plan for 14cOonaids Restaurant.
Committee Action: The Design Review Committee (Chitlea,
Weinberger and Coleman) examined the
revised elevations and site plan, and
recommended approval of the project
subject to the following revisions to
be reviewed and approved by staff
prior to scheduling the project for
Planning Commission:
1. The height at the tower roof
should be lowered.
2. A catalogue cut of the proposed
tables and benches at the patio
should be submitted for review
and approval.
3. The three parking stalls at the
northerly terminus of the "T"
intersection of the circulation
spine should be converted into a
planter area.
4. Enriched paving/pedestrian cross
walks should be revised at the
"T" intersection to make an east
west and a north south connection
across the driveways, connecting
the new proposed sidewalk at the
northeast corner of the subject
site with the southeast corner of
the proposed commercial pad.
2. DR 8~-04 - CAJZNEY ARCHIllECTS
(Bruce) Review of enriched paving and plaza
paving exanq~les for Haven/Arrow Corp.
Center.
Committee Action: The Design Review Committee (Chitiea,
Weinberger and Coleman} recommended
approval of the second alternative
utilizing a 12 inch square slate
pattern Bomacron (stamped concrete)
finish for both the plaza and the
CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA
OCTOBER 19, 1989
Page 2
enriched paving areas in the
driveways. The Bomacron enriched
paving will be enclosed with a minimum
12 inch wide natural color concrete
band. Banding should be utilized
within the enriched paving areas at
the driveways to help separate the
flow of traffic. The Committee
approved the proposed color (Steadman
Buff by L.M. Scofield) for the
patterned concrete.
3. OR ~-O5 - FOOD SERVICE MANA~EMENT
(Bruce) Review revised building elevations and
site plan for Arby's Restaurant.
Committee Action: The Design Review Committee (Chitlea,
Weinberger and Coleman) recommended
approval of the revised building
elevations and site plan subject to
the following revisions:
1. The raised planter at the base of
the tower on the east elevation
should incorporate a trellis of
the same material and color as
the patio lattice.
2. An alternative to the raised
planter with a 3 foot walk at the
base and 3 compact parking spaces
is 6 inch vine pockets with a
4 foot walk. The alternative
should only be used if the walk
around the planter is for wheel
chair access.
3. l'he green accent and roof color
should evaluate the green color
of a weathered copper roof.
Sample colors shall be reviewed
in the field for a final color
selection.
4. Vine pockets should be located at
the base of each column of the
patio arbor and vines should be
incorporated at the drive-thru
arbor.
CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA
OCTOBER 19, 1989
Pa9e 3
5. The proposed concrete tables and
benches should be grey. Trash
containers should match the
finish and color of the tables
and benches.
6. Pedestrian walk "enriched paving'
should match the enriched paving
at the shopping center parking
lot entrances.
4. CUP 89-08 - HUGHES DEVELOPMENT
(Brett) Review revised shopping center plans.
Committee Action: The Design Review Committee {Chitiea,
Weinberger and Coleman) reviewed the
plans and recommended approval of the
project with the following revisions:
1. The tower element above the shops
No. 5 was recommended for use if
three openings (instead of the
two shown) were provided. Option
A was not recommended for use.
2. The tower element above shops
No. 3 was also recommended for
use. Option B was not. The
No. 3 tower detail should be
utilized also on the pad
buildin9s (1, 2, 9, 10, and 11).
3. A colored exposed aggregate
concrete should be used in
conjunction with the tile paver
proposed outside the shops. The
color should complement the red
clay type paver.
4. The signs depicted on the
elevation will not be approved
with the project. A separate
si9n pro9ram must be submitted
for review and approval.
5. The Mobil Gas Station will be
approved under a separate
Conditional Use Permit
application.
CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA
OCTOBER 19, 1989
Page 4
6. The special paver should be
extended the full length of all
the entry drives.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:00 - 6:30 Steve H. October 19, 1989
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-08 - GILBERT AJA -
The development of two warehouse/distribution buildings totaling 305,400
square feet on 15.4 acres of land in the General Industrial District
(Subarea 11), located south of 6th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue ~
APN: 229-263-22.
Background:
This project is within the Mission Business Center, which was approved
as a master plan on September 14, 1988, under Development
Review 88-20. Projects to the south, north, and west of the subject
property within the Mission Business Center have previously been
approved.
Staff Con~nts:
Site Plan:
1. The footprint of Building 1 should be "flipped" as to locate the
truck parking areas, garage, and dock doors within the center of
the project, and minimizing the possibility of viewing these areas
from 6th Street.
2. Adjacent to Building 1, the applicant has proposed truck parking
stalls at a 45 degree angle. The Committee should address the
appropriateness of this situation and how it affects circulation
throughout the project. Another possibility may be to increase the
aisle width for the aisle west of and adjacent to Building i for
more efficient traffic flow.
3. Truck parking/storage areas should be located out of direct public
view from streets.
4. The employee plaza/lunch area for Building i should be relocated to
become a more integral part of the site.
5. The trash enclosures should be relocated to become more accessible
from Building 2 and out of the direct flow of traffic adjacent to
Building 1.
6. Provide interlocking pavers at driveway entrances and at key
pedestrian crossings within the project.
7. Due to the potential difficulty of trucks backing into stalls in
the southwest corner of the site, the truck parking/storage area
should be relocated.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DR 89-08 - GILBERT AJA
Page 2
Landscape:
1. A tapering landscaped planter should be provided north of the
proposed employee plaza/lunch area for Building 2 to reduce
potential traffic problems.
2. Provide additional landscaping near the building entrances to
provide a "focal point" for each building.
Architecture:
1. Additional articulation should be incorporated on the building
elevations to provide 360 degree treatment. Such items may be, but
not limited to;
a. Spandrel glass and/or pop-out slot windows;
b. Variation of textures and colors;
c. Articulation of the building plane (angles, curves, recesses,
protrusions, etc.).
2. The use of reflective glass should be changed to a less reflective
material. The Committee may want to consider the use of varying
textures and glass as used in the approved project immediately to
the south (DR 89-07).
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Betsy Weinberger, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Steve Hayes
The Committee did not recommend approval of the project as proposed.
Instead, the Committee recommended that the plans be revised for further
Committee review.
Building I will not have to be "flipped", due to the difference in grade
from 6th Street and the overall functioning of the build to suit
building. The proposed trash enclosure locations were acceptable to the
Committee. The truck storage area configuration at the southwest corner
of the site was acceptable. The Committee supported the enlargement of
the employee plaza/lunch area for Building 2 and the subsequent deletion
of parking spaces adjacent to and north of the lunch area. The
Committee raised the several concerns regarding the architecture and
site planning at the northeast portion of Building 1.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DR 89-08 - GILBERT AJA
Page 3
The following suggestions for Building 1 were given by the Committee:
1. Provide additional spandrel glass on the northeast corner and the
northeast corner of the "pop-out" section.
2. Extend the landscaping and berming beyond the streetscape near the
northeast corner.
3. Relocate or delete the truck storage spaces near the northeast
corner.
4. Relocate the dock high and grade level doors near the northeast
corner. If this cannot be done, the Committee suggested that the
applicant check into the feasibility of constructing an open beam
trellis structure over the dock-high doors in this area.
5. The employee plaza/lunch area for Building I should be relocated,
east of the present location, closer to the main entrance of the
building. Concrete tables and benches should be included within
the lunch area.
6. In order to minimize potential problems with blockage of the drive
aisles on the west side of Building 1, the planter area between the
west property line and the 45 degree angle truck parking should be
increased in size.
7. Interlocking pavers should be incorporated at drive entrances, key
pedestrian crossings, and gathering areas.
8. The landscape near the main building entrances should be upgraded
by including large (36 inch and 48 inch box) trees. The trees
should be planted in clusters and frame the entrances. Also
providing different species of trees.
9. The secondary entrances for Building 2 should be upgraded to
include elements such as, additional glass, a "pop-out" trellis
structure, repetition of pavement score lines as used by the main
entrance and concrete columns with an arbor.
10. The entire base portion of the building should be of a light
sandblast texture.
11. The parapet wall should be extended to other areas of the buildings
in order to screen any possible future roof mounted equipment.
12. Semi-reflective glass, identical to the glass used on all second-
floor windows on the project to the south (DR 89-07), should be
used on all second-floor glass areas within this project.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:30 - 7:00 Bruce October 19, 1989
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-12 - DAVIES The
development of Phase II and III including four (4) industrial buildings
totaling 18,395 square feet on 2.46 acres of land in the General
Industrial District (Subarea 3), located on Feron Boulevard, east of
Helms Avenue - APN: 209-031-87 and 88.
Background:
Phase I of the subject industrial development includes four (4)
buildings on 1.86 acres of land. The facade of the existing buildings
consists primarily of slumpstone construction. llqe design including
slumpstone construction does not meet the current City standards for a
general industrial type of building. The applicant is proposing that
the new buildings match the appearance of the existing buildings. At
least two (2) of the proposed buildings will abut 2 exist buildings to
give the appearance of one larger building.
Following are staff concerns based on the project background and a
review of the proposed plans:
Staff Conm~ents:
Architecture:
1. Should proposed materials, colors and design match existing
buildings?
2. Consider use of a more decorative block or tilt-up concrete
construction.
3. Accent stripe and color dates the architectural style, however, it
is a strong unifying element.
4. Introduction of more glass to accent building entrances.
5. Repetition of different textures on building facades other than
glass and concrete block to unify buildings.
Site Plan:
1. Centralized location for plaza area on Phase II.
2. Location of Building G in relation to proposed preserved oak tree
in Phase III.
3. Size of planter areas at east elevation of Buildings F, E and G.
4. Introduction of additional planter areas at south boundary of
Phase II and east boundary of Phase III.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DR 89-12 - DAVIES
Page 2
5. Enriched paving at parking lot entrances, plaza pedestrian
circulation and building entrances.
Landscape/Site Amenities:
1. Development of la~m area with additional plant material.
2. Screening along drainage easement along south boundary of Phase II
and screening along east property line of Phase III.
3. Provide details of site lighting.
4. Introduction of lighted bollards to emphasize building entrances.
Design Review Conmsittee Action:
Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Betsy Weinberger, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Bruce Abbott
The Design Review Committee reviewed the site plans and elevations for
the proposed 2nd and 3rd phase of the industrial development. The
Committee recommended that revised plans be resubmitted for review
addressing the following recommendations:
Architecture:
1. The proposed materials, colors and design should not match existing
buildings.
2. Tilt-up concrete construction should be considered. Slumpstone
concrete block should not be used as it does not meet City
standards for design of industrial buildings.
3. The proposed accent stripe should not be used.
4. Different textures other than glass and painted concrete, such as
sandblasted concrete will need to be used on the building facades.
5. Additional glass should be utilized to strengthen the building
entrances.
Site Plan:
1. The plaza area at Phase II needs to be in a centralized location.
2. Building G should be located no closer than 15 feet from the
proposed preserved oak tree in Phase III.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DR 89-12 - DAVIES
Page 3
3. The planter areas at the front of Buildings F, E and G should be
increased in width to 8 feet for tree planting.
4. Additional planter areas for screening should be used at the south
boundary of Phase II and at the east boundary of Phase III.
5. The lawn area should be developed as a small park which could
accommodate the plaza area or a master plan for development of that
portion of the site will need to be provided.
6. Provide enriched paving at parking lot entrances, plaza and
building entrances. Enriched paving consists of concrete
interlocking pavers enclosed by minimum 12 inch width concrete
banding.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 - 7:30 Brett October 19, 1989
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-16 - CHILI'S - The
development of a restaurant totaling 5,995 square feet within an
approved integrated community shopping center consistin9 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 Committee (Chitiea, Weinberger, Coleman) reviewed the project
previously on July 20, 1989.
Staff Co~mnents:
A. Based in previous Committee Comments and additional staff review,
the Committee should address the following concerns:
1. Size of wall signs.
2. Detailing of the area previously occupied by signs.
3. The color of the awnings.
B. Staff recommends the following revisions:
1. Parapet height variation should be provided on the front
elevation.
2. Provide details of outdoor seating {type, location, etc.}.
3. A tile roof element should be used along the right side of the
right elevation. The tile base should also be extended.
4. Consider use of spandrel glass along the right side elevation.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Betsy Weinberger, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Brett Homer
The Committee reviewed the plans and made the following recommendations:
1. The rear elevation should have a tile roof element over the cooler
to match the pitch and design of the other tile roof elements on
the structure. The roof drains and outdoor ladder should be
deleted.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DR 89-16 - CHILI'S
Page 2
2. The parapet height of the small tower element above the entry on
the front elevation should be heightened 3 to 5 feet and perhaps
wider. The free standing sign should be flush with the wall and
reduced in size to 18" in height.
3. A trellis with vines and espaliers should be provided where the
sign was deleted on the right side elevation.
4. An overhead arbor and benches for seating should be added along the
left elevation on the blank portion of that facade. The sign
should be reduced in size to a maximum 18" height and relocated
somewhere above the arbor structure.
5. The stucco color should match the primary stucco color for the
entire Town Center. The cap/cornice should also match the Center's
in terms of design and accent color.
6. The awnings along the right side elevation should be deleted and
replaced with a tile roof element, solid green or white awnings, or
similar detail. The Committee felt the multi-colored awnings were
acceptable on the front elevation.
7. The proposed outdoor seating of the entry area should be shown on
the plans.
8. Tree plantings, including those provided with the Town Center
improvements should be shown on the landscape plan.
9. Examples of other Chili's buildings with similar stucco colors and
the proposed awnings should be submitted for review to determine
color compatibility.
The applicant was instructed to submit revised plans for additional
Committee review.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:30 - 8:00 Vince October 19, 1989
MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-36 O'DONNELL ARMSTRONG A
modification to a previously approved site plan and building elevations
for an industrial warehouse/manufacturing building totaling 77,757
square feet on 5.94 acres of land in the minimum Impact Heavy Industrial
designation (Subarea 9) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the
south side of Arrow Route at Milliken Avenue - APN: 229-111-23.
Staff C0~m~ents:
In order to accommodate the applicant's schedule, staff comments will
not be available until the meeting.
Design Review Co~m~ittee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, David Blakesley, Otto Kroutil
Staff Planner: Vince Bertoni
The Committee approved the project modification of additional dock-high
doors with the following conditions:
1. The freestanding wall along the northern property line should be
removed and the proposed planter should be expanded along the north
and south sides.
2. The proposed wall should be painted to match the building color.
3. Additional planter fingers should be added to the parking lot east
of the loading dock area.
4. Specimen size trees should be used in the parking lot and
additional plant materials should be provided in the triangular
planter area.
5. Additional landscaping should be provided around the trash
enclosu re along the north elevation.