Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/06/04 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAM~GA MEMORANDUM DATE: May 19, 1987 ACTION AGENDA 1977 TO: Conmnercial/Industrial Design Review Committee Suzanne Chitlea Larry McNiel Dan Coleman FROM: Nancy Fon9, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 4~ 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 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-19 - LENNON ARCHITECTS The development of a warehouse industrial building of 30,022 square feet on 1.635 acres of land within the General Industrial District (Subarea 5) located at the northeast corner of Turner Avenue and Sharon Circle - APN: 209-261-15 6:30 - 7:00 (Debra) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-22 - MESSENGER CAPITAL PARTNERS The development of a warehouse industrial building of 260,000 square feet on 12.6 acres of land within the General Industrial District (Subarea 14) located on the east side of Santa Anita Avenue approximately 1,800 feet north of 4th Street - APN: 229-321-14, 15, 16 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA Commercial/Industrial June 4, 1987 Page 2 7:00 - 7:30 (Chris) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-21 NALBANDIAN ~ A proposal to construct two multi-tenant warehouse/manufacturing buildings totaling 118,367 square feet on 6.25 acres in the General Industrial District, Subarea 5, located on the south side of 6th Street adjacent to an AT&SF rail spur west of Lucas Ranch Road - APN: 210-071-51 7:30 - 8:00 (Chris) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87- 07 - SARKISSIAN - A proposal to develop a 14,000 square foot retail center including a 2,900 square foot restaurant on 1.26 acres of land in a General Commercial District located at the southwest corner of Malven Avenue and Arrow Highway - APN: 209-041-49, 50 NF:vc Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council Commerc i al/Industri al CONSENT CALEI~AR ITEMS AGEM)A June 4, 1987 1. DR 87-10 - SOUTHWEST SAVINGS (Chris) Review of revised elevations. Committee Action: The revisions were approved, however a modification to the first floor windows shall be provided at the Planning Commission hearing. 2. CUP 87-04 - DONLEY-BENNLmm (Debra) Review of revised elevations. Committee Action: All details and revisions to project were approved as shown. The Committee, however, did recommend a base be used on the columns, somewhat like center depicted in photographs. 3. CUP 86-04 - RYDER (Debra) Review of fence details. Committee Action: Fence approved as shown with ground cover as directed by City Planner. 4. DR 86-35 - CITY OF Pd~NCHO CUCAMONGA (Nancy) Review of revised elevations. Committee Action: Approved. 5. DR 86-09 - BIXBY (Nancy) Review of monu~nt sign. Committee Action: Approved for the 3 corners {4th & Pittsburgh, 6th & Milliken, 6th & Pittsburgh} and with conditions that the reveal shall be substantial (3/4 inch minimum) and street name shall be colored. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Debra June 4, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-19 - LENNON ARCHITECTS The development of a warehouse industrial building o~ 30,022 square feet on 1.635 acres of land within the General Industrial District (Subarea 5) locate at the northeast corner of Turner Avenue and Sharon Circle - APN: 209-261-15. Design Parameters: This parcel is one of six created in a subdivision of land around Sharon Circle and the corner of 6th Street and Turner Avenue. Street improvements were constructed around Sharon Circle at the time of the subdivision. However, Turner Avenue improvements have been delayed due to the existing open drainage channel in this area. The natural ground slopes north to south at an approximate 2% gradient, and no trees or other significant vegetation remain. Staff Coam~ents: A. Site Plan Employee outdoor eating areas should be provided as an integral part of site design. A portion of the main entry court could be designed for outdoor lunch use. The area should be screened by use of low profile walls and shrubs, and provided with some structure or trees that shade the pedestrian space. Benches, drinking fountain, trash receptacle and other appropriate hardscape should be provided to enhance the function and appearance of the space. B. Landscaping I. The landscaping along the north property line should provide dense landscaping, including evergreen trees on 15-20 foot centers as well as a tall growing shrubs to screen the loading area from south bound traffic on Turner Avenue. 2. A minimum 5 foot landscape strip should be provided to the northwest elevation. C. Architecture 1. The proposed graphic detailing is characteristic of a trend setting pattern that may prove to prematurely date the style. Staff suggests a more subtle variation to the graphics to minimize dating the project. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-19 - Lennon Architects June 4, 1987 Page 2 2. The main focal point of the building should be at the office entrance area. The metal trellis and concrete columns should be heavier in scale to provide a strong architectural statement. Design Review Ca~aittee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Suzanne Chitiea, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Debra Meier The Committee recommended approval of the project with the following recommended revisions: 1. Provide an enlarged detail of the plaza for Planning Commission review. The eating areas should be pulled away from building entries to the extent possible and separated from the entries by use of landscaping and/or low profile walls. 2. The landscaping along the north property line should include shrubs growing 6' to 8' in height as well as trees on 15' to 20' centers. 3. Landscaping should be provided along the most northerly buildng projection near the northwest building corner. 4. At the driveway entrance provide shrub massing and annual color to clearly define the entry. 5. The graphic design used on the Turner Avenue elevation should be subdued with a detail very similar to that shown on the south elevation. 6. The metal trellis provided consists of 2" tubing with 18" concrete square columns for support. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Debra June 4, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-22 MESSENGER CAPITAL PARTNERS - The development of a warehouse industrial building ot 260,000 square feet on 12.6 acres of land within the General Industrial District (Subarea 14) located on the east side of Santa Anita Avenue approximately 1,800 feet north of 4th Street - APN: 229-321-14, 15, 16 Design Parameters: This site is the third in a series of new industrial projects on the east side of Santa Anita Avenue. Directly south of this site is the only older facility on the block, and that structure has recently been through the Minor Development Review process and in the process of completing minor site modifications and will be fully landscaping the street frontage. The AT&SF railroad abuts the site to the east and this project is providing rail spur access to the building. The natural ground slopes north to south at an approximate 2% gradient. A 10 foot berm traverses the site about one-quarter of the distance up from the south property line. Staff Co~m~ents: A. Site Plan 1. The pavement area at the west side of the building is 212 feet wide, when 150 feet would probably suffice. The streetscape could be improved by utilizing some of that space to move the screen wall back. By doing so the screen wall could be 14 feet high on the parking lot side with berming and landscaping up to an 8' wall height along the streetscape. {See Exhibit "B") 2. Provide 8' high screen walls along edge auto parking bays as shown on Exhibit "A". 3. Lunch areas are proposed off-set from the main office entries. These outdoor eating areas should include benches, tables, drinking fountains, trash receptacles and other appropriate street furniture. The lunch area should also be set apart from the entry by use of low profile shrubs and shade trees to enhance the function and appearance of the space. B. Architecture The proposed streetscape screen wall includes architectural features used at the main office entry areas, including ribbed sandblasted concrete elements and concrete panels with horizontal reveals. The bulk of the building will be screened from general public view. The two office entries and the streetscape screen wall become the key features to the building's architectural statement. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-22 - Messenger Capital Partners June 4, 1987 Page 2 C. Landscaping 1. Provide landscaping along the south building elevation {1 tree per 30 linear foot building frontage} to interrupt the expansive horizontal and vertical surface as well as provide shade to the adjacent parking stalls {1 tree per 3 stalls}. Design Review Co~m~ittee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Suzanne Chitiea, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Debra Meier The Committee recommended approval of the project with the following recommended revisions: 1. The screen wall along the streetscape shall be 14 feet high with landscaped berms up to a 6'-8' wall height facing the street. 2. Provide an enlarged detail of the plazas for Planning Commission review. The eating areas shuld be pulled away from building entries to the extent possible and separated from the entries by use of landscaping and/or low profile walls. Also the eating area should be screened from the loading area by using screen walls and landscaping. 3. Provide alternate color chip selections for the accent stripe to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. 4. Provide landscaping along the south building elevation {1 tree per 30 linear foot building frontage) to interrupt the expansive horizontal and vertical surface as well as provide shade to the adjacent parking stalls {1 tree per 3 stalls). DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Chris June 4, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-21 - NALBANDIAN - A proposal to construct two multi-tenant warehouse/manufacturing buildings totaling 118,367 square feet on 6.25 acres in the General Industrial District, Subarea 5, located on the south side of 6th Street adjacent to an AT&SF rail spur west of Lucas Ranch Road - APN: 210-071-51 Design Parameters: The site is relatively flat and vacant with no significant vegetation. The parcels east and west are developed with warehousing facilities. The properties north and south are vacant. Street improvements have not been completed. Staff Comments: Site Plan 1. An avera9e 45 foot landscape setback is required along 6th Street as a Special Boulevard. 2. Screen walls which mimic the ziggurat pattern should be located at the north end of the project in order to reduce views into the loading area. 3. A driveway aisle connection should be provided directly southwest of the main drive entry to eliminate to the amount of turns cars/trucks have to make. Architecture 1. The ziggurat contrast on the north building faces and interior faces of Building A & B should be popped-out. 2. The west face of Building A should continue the ziggurat contrasting. 3. The dock and all other roll-up doors should be the same primary color as the building. 4. The tan contrasting color should be continued back along the office wings and follow the length of the loading dock face. 5. Should the palette of colors used be compatible with adjacent projects? (Photos will be available for Committee review.) DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-21 - Nalbandian June 4, 1987 Page 2 Landscaping 1. Special landscaping treatment such as a continuation of specimen size trees, increased number of trees, accent trees, undulating moundin9, etc. should be provided along 6th Street as a Special Boulevard. 2. Landscaping should be provided along the south building faces. (1 tree per 30 foot building frontage.) 3. Special landscape treatment should be provided at the employee plaza areas such as specimen size trees and flowering shrubs and ground cover. Detailed plan should be provided for further Committee review prior to issuance of permits. Design Review Co~m~ittee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Larry McNiel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Chris Westman The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval to the Planning Commission with the following conditions: 1. A screen wall should be provided at the project entry incorporating the ziggurat design, which will block views of the loading dock areas. 2. The ziggurat contrast on the north building faces and interior faces of buildings A & B should inset approximately one inch. 3. The dock and all other roll up doors should be painted the same primary color as the building. 4. The tan contrasting color should be continued back along the office wings and follow the length of the loading dock face. 5. Special landscaping shuld be provided along 6th Street incorporating specimen size trees, undulating mounding, shrubs and ground cover. 6. Vines to be determined by the City Planner, should be planted the length of the west building face of building A and at the northeastern section of building B. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-21 - Nalbandian June 4, 1987 Page 3 7. Should the rail spur not be provided to serve building B, landscaping should be provided subject to City Planner review and approval. 8. Textured paving should be provided at the vehicle entry at 6th Street and at the office entry areas. 9. The buildings color palette should be approved by Design Review prior to the issuance of building permits. 10. A detail of the employee lunch areas hardscape and landscape should be provided for Design Review approval prior to building permit issuance. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:00 Chris June 4, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-01 - SARKISSIAN - A proposal to develop a 14,000 square foot retail center includin9 a 2,900 square foot restaurant on 1.26 acres of land in a General Commercial District located at the southwest corner of Malven Avenue and Arrow Highway - APN: 209-041-49, 50 Design Parameters: The project is vacant with no significant vegetation. The adjoining site has a Jack-in-the-Box with a reciprocal access agreement along the property line. The Chino Basin Municipal Water District site to the south is zoned residential. The site to the east is the Neighborhood Center and north across Arrow Highway is existing residential. Street improvements have been completed on Malven; however, not on Arrow. A request for a variance has been made for parking setbacks and average landscaping along Arrow Route in order to accommodate this design. Staff Comments: Site Plan 1. The site appears overdeveloped because of the restaurant building configuration. Parking has been calculated as a sit- down (non-fast food) restaurant. However, staff is concerned that the size of the restaurant building may attract a fast food tenant for which the site would be under parked by 9 stalls. 2. The parking space north and adjacent to the restaurant building should be eliminated and the plaza area should be expanded into that space in order to provide for an outdoor area free from automobiles. 3. The area at the southeast corner of the restaurant building used for deliveries should be screened from public view with a combination of walls and landscaping. 4. A texturized pedestrian connection across the circulation aisle should be provided from the southwest corner of the restaurant to the retail/medical building. This could be facilitated by moving handicap spaces to this location. 5. A sidewalk connection from the restaurant entrance to Arrow should be provided. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 87-01 - Sarkissian June 4, 1987 Page 2 Architecture 1. The variety of colors and design elements draws away from architectural definition. The number of colors should be reduced and design elements simplified in order to strengthen the overall style definition. 2. A stronger vertical element incorporated into the building design to break-up the strip commercial appearance should be provided, such as variation in roof height, towers or breaks in the roof line. 3. The column appears top heavy, where the same staggered treatment and mass should be added to the bottom of the column. 4. Additional elements as introduced in the front elevation should be repeated to the rear elevation of retail/medical building. 5. Should an architecturally designed trellis be provided for shade in the outdoor eatin9 area or would umbrella-style tables be appropriate? Landscapin~ 1. A minimum 5 foot landscape trip should be provided along the west side of retail/medical building. 2. A minimum 5 foot landscape strip should be provided along the south side of restaurant building. 3. Landscaping should be provided alon9 the west and south facades of the restaurant building, with special treatment around the outdoor eating area. 4. The landscape plan generally does not carry out a theme and should be coordinated more with the buildin9 desi9n. 5. Special landscape treatment such as increased number of trees, specimen, size trees, accent trees and undulating mounding should be provided along Arrow Route and Malven Avenue. 6. The landscape planters in front of the retail/medical building should be increased significantly in size. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 87-01 - Sarkissian June 4, 1987 Page 3 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Chris Westman The Committee reviewed the project and directed the applicant to return to the next Design Review Committee meeting, June 18, 1987, with a revised site plan and elevations incorporating the following comments: 1. The two parking spots adjacent to the restaurant shall be replaced with landscaping. 2. A detail of the plaza area shall be provided for review. 3. Textured pedestrian accesses shall be provided from the public sidewalk on Arrow to the restaurant and from the restaurant to the retal building to the south. 4. The elevations shall be revised with rounded arches, heavier uniform width columns with detailed bases, and fewer verticle roof appendiges. 5. More articulation shall be provided to the south elevation of the retail building. 6. A five foot landscaping strip shall be provided to the south elevation of the restaurant. 7. Planting pockets shall be provided tio the west elevations of the retail building and restaurant. 8. Special landscaping treatment shall be provided within the landscape setback area along Arrow Highway and Malven Avenue. 9. The number of planting areas on the north side of the retail buildin9 shall be increased. 10. Pictures shall be provided illustrating the applicants use of stucco and split face block.