Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/02/19 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: February 3, 1987 ACTION AGENDA TO: Commercial / I ndu stri al Design Review Committee Suzanne Chitiea Larry McNiel Dan Col eman Bruce Emeri ck ( A1 ternate FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 19, 1987 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 (Debra) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86- 04 - RYDER - The development of a truck rental lease, sale and maintenance facility on 4.23 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14) located on the west side of Santa Anita Avenue north of 4th Street - APN: 229-331-06. 6:30 - 7:00 (Debra) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-45 - MISSION LAND CO. - The review of a five lot master plan of 15.39 acres and development of lots 2 and 3 of the master plan. Lot 2 consisting of a 42,600 square foot industrial building on 2.32 acres and lot 3 consisting of a 53,500 square foot industrial building on 2.72 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12) located on the east side of Pittsburg north of 4th Street and south of 6th Street - APN: 22g-263-3 and 4. Design Review Commi tree Agenda COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL February 19, 1987 Page 2 7:00 - 7:30 (Nancy) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-40 - CHG ARCHITECT INC. - The development of a 4,000 square foot bank (security Pacific National Bank) on 0.68 acres of land within an approved 15.3 acres shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the northeast corner of Baseline Road and Haven Avenue - APN: 202-801-25 and 26. 7:30 - 8:00 (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-37 - KEITH CO. - The development of a master plan for a 79.17 acre ~ustrial park consisting of 33 lots in an Industrial Park District (Subarea 16), located at the northwest quadrum of 4th Street and Archibald Avenue - APN: 2110-62-02, 11, 13, 26, 32 and 33. NF:vc Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council Commercial/Industrial CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENDA February 19, 1987 1. DR 85-26 - FORECAST (Nancy) Review of changes to office entry way. Committee Action: The Committee did not approve the proposed straight store front entry way. 2. DR 86-42 - LEFF Review of conceptual site plan. (Debra) Con~ittee Action: The Committee was informed of the progress of this project, who has the following major concerns: (a) The two story office buildings do not have entry statements or entry areas that enhance the quality of the project; and (b) The site plan lacks a general "campus-like" setting that is characteristic of much of Rancho Cucamonga Business Park. They indicated that landscaped areas less than 5 feet in width were unacceptable. 4. DR 86-24 - GILBERT AJA (Chrls) Review of building elevations. Committee Action: The Committee stated that architecture and parapet screening appears acceptable. However, a sight line study should be submitted for further Committee review. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Debra February 19, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86-04 - RYDER - The development of a truck rental, lease, sale and maintenance facility on 4.23 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14) located on the west side of Santa Anita Avenue north of 4th Street - APN: 229-331-06. Design Parameters This site, as well as other undeveloped properties in this area, are existing vineyards. Directly east of this site is a recent completed warehouse industrial project. Curb and gutter improvements are existing along Santa Anita Avenue, parkway improvements will occur with the development of this project. Abutting the project to the west is the unimproved Day Creek Flood Control Corridor. This has proven to be the biggest constraint on the site. While the proposed structure must be protected from flood waters, they must also be able to pass through the western portion of the site in a relatively unobscured manner. The site slopes gently in the southwestern direction at 2-3%. The proposed land use has been classified as Medium, Wholesale, Storage & Distribution which includes moving ans storage services. Staff Comments Site P1 an: 1. The front area of this site is customer and employee parking and landscaping. The truck parking area will be screened from street view by an 8-foot decorative wall. The remainder of the site is intended for parking, maintenance, fueling and related activities. 2. Amenities for employee outdoor eating area will be provided at the south west corner of the site. Arch i tectu re: 1. The plaster used at the office areas shoulo be replaced with sandblast concrete surface. 2. The 8-foot block screen wall shou)~ also be sandblast or split-face block. The barbed wire V-brackets are not permitted in the General Industrial District, perhaps an addition of 2-foot of wrought iron would add the desired security. 3. The security gate shoul~ be of sliding metal rather than chain-link. Design Review Con~nents CUP 86-04 - RYDER February 19, 1987 Page 2 Landscaping: 1. Intensified landscaping with speciman size trees should be provided where possible along the north, south and west property lines to provide screening from freeway views. Design Review C..m. ittee Action Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Brad Bullet Staff Planner: Debra Meier The Committee would like to review revisions to this project that have addressed the following concerns: 1. Increase the amount of landscaping area along the street frontage through adding landscaped finger islands to the parking lot and additional landscaping area along the building frontage, etc. 2. The outdoor lunch area should be relocated nearer to the office area of the building, where it would be designed in a more inviting fashion, screened with low profile walls/shrubs, shading and other appropriate amenities. 3. The office area of the building should be enhanced by the extended use of spandrel glass to create a greater statement at the corner. Variation in the vertical building plane would be desirable too. 4. The screen wall facing Santa Anita Road should receive a decorative treatment and be an extension of building architecture. 5. The security gates should be of a solid decorative metal material for screening and durability purposes. 6. Along the west property line, landscaping should include 24" box size evergreen trees. 7. Fencing alternatives along portions of the north and south property lines shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the property owner, Engineering Division and the Design Review Committee. Design Review Comments CUP 86-04 - RYDER February 19, 1987 Page 3 8. The sign indicated on the rear of the building will not be acceptable. 9. The signage facing Santa Anita Road could be improved by using individual letters and a canned logo rather than one large internally illuminated can sign. DESIGN REVIEW COI~IENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Debra February 19, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-45 - MISSION LAND CO. - The review of a five lot Master Plan of 15.39 acres and development om lots 2 and 3 of the Master Plan. Lot 2 consisting of a 42,600 square foot industrial building on 2.32 acres and lot 3 consisting of a 53,500 square foot industrial building on 2.72 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12) located on the east side of Pittsburg north of 4th Street and south of 6th Street - APN: 229-263-3 and 4. Design Parameters The Master Plan area consists of five lots along the east side of Pittsburg Avenue south of 6th Street. Lot i is currently under construction with a 58,500 square foot industrial building. Lots 2 and 3 are being reviewed for approval with this application while lots 4 and 5 are intended for future development. The majority of this site presently remains as vineyard, the vineyards will remain until each lot is developed. The eastern boundary of the master plan will become the border between the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12) and the General Industrial District (Subarea 11). Directly across Pittsburg Avenue is the Bixby Master Plan with Phase I under construction. Street improvements are in along exterior streets, parkway improvements will occur with the development of each lot of the Master Plan. Staff Commaents Site Plan: Employee outdoor eating areas must be provided as a part of each site design. Should the entry courts be provided with amenities for outdoor lunch use, or should a separate lunch court be provided with amenities such as shaded seating areas, landscaping, textured surfaces, Kiosks, trash receptacles and other street furniture? Landscaping: The landscape concept along Pittsburg Avenue should continue consistent with that of lot i which is under construction. The design includes mounded turf with boulder groupings and clusters of White Alder and Pine alternating along the streetscape. Design Review Comments DR 86-45 - MISSION LAND CO. February 19, 1987 Page 2 Architecture: The architecture is consistent with the theme established on lot 1, with a stand alone entry frame accented to match window mullions. To achieve a continuity of design for the Master Plan, of particular concern is building accent colors. Lot 1 uses a blue accent, lots 2 and 3 are proposing yellow and red, respectively. Will these colors be compatible throughout the master plan as well as with nearby buildings? Oesign Review Committee Action Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Brad Buller Staff Planner: Debra Meier This project must be returned to the Committee for additional review after addressing the following Committee concerns: 1. Lunch courts should be provided with appropriate amenities and should be separated and di sti nct from the entry plazas. 2. The revised building colors should be submitted to the Planning Division on a revised material sample board. The "burgundy" and "aqua" shades presented to the Committee were more acceptable than the proposed red and yellows. 3. The site plan lacks the "campus-like" setting that is characteristic of the Industrial Park District. 4. The Committee expressed a concern that certain driveway entries lacked any kind of interest or statement while others are unbalanced with large statements on one side. 5. Variation in the vertical building plane would be desirable, but should be compatible with concept of the Bixby Master Plan which is presently under construction on the west side of Pittsburgh (see Exhibit A). 6. The Master Planning of this parcel shoulQ focus on the Pittsburgh streetscape and unity with the Bixby Master Plan. The remaining (eastern) portion of the block is designated as General Industrial District and should be Master Planned at some future date. However, shared access from the proposed southerly east-west street between the two Master Planned portions of the site should be considered. Bixby/Rancho Cucamonga Business Park DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Nancy February 19, 1987 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-40 - CHG ARCHITECT INC. - The development of a 4,000 square foot bank {Security Pacific National Bank) on 0.68 acres of land within an approved 15.3 acres shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the northeast corner of Baseline Road and Haven Avenue - APN: 202-801-25, 26. Design Parameters Project site is part of the approved Terra Vista Village Master Plan of an integrated shopping center as shown in Attachment "A". The approved master plan for the shopping center indicates that this pad area is planned for a future retail building. The applicant is proposing to construct a Security Pacific National Bank on this site. Staff Coments Site Plan: The proposed site plan is consistent with the approved master plan of this Terra Vista Village Shopping Center. Elevation: The proposed elevations contain some of the architectural details of the approved shopping center, such as towers and an arcade around the building. However the proposed elevations could be improved in the following ways: 1. The stucco over should be of heavier wood to provide adequate shadow line. 2. The curvilinear parapet as shown on east elevation appears to be out of scale with the rest of the roof line. Perhaps the size of this curvilinear parapet could be reduced. 3. Heavy wood rafters could be added to the second level of the roof line. Landscaping: Landscaping theme is consistent with the perceptual approved landscape plan for this shopping center. Design Review Comfittee Action Members Present Suzanne Chitiea, Brad Buller Staff Planner: Nancy Fong Design Review Comments February Page 2 The Committee recommended approved with the following conditions: 1. The stucco over should be of heavy wood to provide adequate shadow patterns. 2. Heavy wood rafter should be added to the first level of the roof line. 3. The curvilinear gable as shown on east elevation should be lowered to be below the height of the tower. 4. The stucco material and color should be of "Santa Barbara" style consistent with the Tetra Vista Village Shopping Center. 5. Random stacking of clay roof tile should be provided, consistent with the Tetra Vista Village Shopping Center. 6. The landscaping under the west and north arcade should be changed to textured pedestrian walkway consistent with the Tetra Vista Shopping Center. In lieu of this landscaping, tree wells and free standing potted planters should be provided along the west and north arcade. 7. The revised elevation should include conceptual signage and shall be submitted for Committee review prior to forwarding to Planning Commission review. 8. The developer also stated that all ATM facility is within the building and totally enclosed. DESIGN REVIEW COft~IENTS 7:30 - 8:00 Nancy February 19, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-37 - KEITH CO. - The development of a master plan for a 79.17 acre industrial park consisting of 33 lots in an Industrial Park District Subarea 16, located at the northwest quadrum of 4th Street and Archibald Avenue - APN: 2110-62-02, 11, 13, 26, 32, and 33. Design Parameters On December 4, 1986, the Committee reviewed the proposed master plan and provided directions to the applicant in revising the master plan to address their concerns (see attached Decemoer 4, 1986 Design Review Committee Action Comments). The developer has submitted a revised master pl an for Committee review. Staff Comments 1. The Committee stated that the site plan and guidelines should be expanded and include provisions for shared access between parcel s, limited access on 4th Street according to the City Policies and no access on Archibald Avenue. Further, the illustrative site plan on page 6 of the Master Plan text should be revised to show shared access between parcels and limited access allowed on 4th Street. Commaent: The developer disagrees with a policy of encouraging ~access between parcels and has requested full Planning Commission discussion on this item. However, the developer has revised the illustrative site plan to reflect the limited access along 4th Street, while written criteria has been provided to encourage grouping of access points as shown in page 4 and 10 of the revised Master Plan text. 2. The Committee stated that the Master Plan boundaries should be expanded to include the triangle piece to the west abutting the Cucamonga Creek. The reason for requiring a master planning of this piece is to assure that the tip of the triangle would not become a open "no man's land". Cosmerit: The developer has relocated the proposed Street "G" to a'~'O't'tr'the westerly adjacent property as recommended by the Engineering Division, thus, providing an additional frontage access for this parcel. Design Review Comments DR 86-37 - KEITH CO. February 19, 1987 Page 2 3. The Committee stated that written criteria shoul~ be added to encourage building placement that create opportunities for plazas or other landscaped open spaces and encourage to spatially enclosed open space on the same site or adjoining site. Building orientation should include consideration of wind protection for site activities. Graphic examples should also be given supplementing the written criteria. Comment: The revised Master Plan text show additional graphic examp~s for entry plaza scheme, visitors entries, exterior people space etc. as shown in page 25-27 of the document. 4. The Committee stated that written and graphic criteria should be added to the Master Plan for the uniform design of perimeter fencing or walls, should the uses require such security fencing. Comment: Graphic design or examples have not been provided in the ~ master plan document. Further, chain-link fence is not allowed within the Industrial Park District and should be eliminated from the written criteria. 5. The Committee stated that special design considerations in areas of building massing and landscape treatment should be provided to the corner of 4th Street and Archibald Avenue as it is the gateway to the City. Commmnt: The revised Master Plan text did not show any graphic exam~s to further illustrate the building massing at this corner. 6. The Committee stated that detailed preliminary grading plans should be provided that show concepts of on-site grading for each parcel development, and to be submitted for Grading Committee Review. Cmm~ent: The revised grading plan has been forwarded to the Grading ~ee for review. 7. The Committee stated that written graphic criteria shoul~ be added for require design consideration of the location of loading areas. Cmm~nt: Graphic examples have been provided as shown in page 25 of the revised Master Plan text. 8. The Committee stated that graphic examples shou)~ be provided for the proposed architectural design features as listed in page 21 of the Master Plan text. Design Review Comments DR .6-37co. February7 Page 3 Cemment: Graphic examp)es have been illustrated as shown in page L~;~7"~f the revised Master Plan text. g. The Committee stated that graphic examples of parking lot landscaping should be provided in a Master Plan text. Cemment: Graphic examp)es have not been provided in the revised l~t'~F'Plan text. Oesign Review Cmittee Action Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Brad Buller Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee recommended that the project be revised for additional Committee review as follows: 1. The site planning guidelines should be expanded to include provisions for shared access according to the City access policies and design guidelines. However, the developer disagreed with the policy of encouraging shared access between parcels and requested for full Planning Commission on this item. 2. Graphic design or examples should be added to the Master Plan for the uniform design of perimeter fencing or wall, should the users require such security fencing. Although chain link type of fencing material may be allowed when not visible from the front setback area, they are discouraged within Industrial Park District. 3. Special design considerations in areas of building massing and landscape treatment should be provided to the corner of 4th Street and Archibald Avenue as it is the "gateway" to the City. The developer disagrees with this recommendation of providing building massing and landscape treatment to the corner of 4th Street and Archibald. The developer requests for full Planning Commission discussion for this item. 4. Graphic examples of landscaping parking lot should be provided in the Master Plan text.