HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/07/02 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA ~
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 18, 1987 ACTION AGENDA
1977
TO: Commercial/I ndustri al
Design Review Committee Suzanne Chitiea
Larry McNiel
Dave B1 akesl ey ( A1 ternate )
FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF JULY 2, 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) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-20 MODIFICATION - HIMES-PETERS
ARCHITECTS - The request to modify the approved color of
three warehouse distribution buildings totaling 237,519
square feet on 11.06 acres of land in the General
Industrial District (Subarea 13) located at the
northwest corner of 6th Street and Rochester Avenue -
APN: 229-261-38 and 39.
6:30 - 7:00
(Chris) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-24 -
PIER i IMPORTS, WEST - A proposal to construct a 165,074
square foot warehouse/distribution building addition in
the General Industrial District, Subarea 11, on 18.8
acres of land located on the west side of Buffalo
Avenue, north of 6th Street - APN: 229-262-27.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA
Commercial/Industrial
July 2, 1987
Page 2
7:00 - 9:00
(Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-
16 - NUWEST - The development of an 8.2 acre integrated
shopping center, consisting of four buildings totaling
87,581 square feet in the General Commercial District,
located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard
and Hellman Avenue - APN: 208-261-58.
9:00 - 9:30
(Chris) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-04 - TOWER PARTNERS (EDWARD'S
CINEMA) - A request to modify the approved elevations by
su"~b'~tFi=[uting an arbor along the north and south
elevations for a 3/4 inch reveal for a theatre located
at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven
Avenue - APN: 1077-104-1, 3.
9:30 - 11:00
(Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-25 -
BARTON - The development of 39.39 acre mixed use Master
~ consisting of 14 acres Medical Office and 25.39
acres Administrative/Professional Office in the
Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located on the
north side of Utica Avenue between White Oak Street and
Red Oak Street - APN: 208-351-25 and 26. Related to
this project is the request to amend the Rancho
Cucamonga Business Park Master Plan by redesignating the
subject site from Corporate Plaza to Medical Office and
Administrative/Professional Office, and the deletion of
the public street connection through the site area.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-
17 - BARTON/CONTINENTAL HEALTH - The development of a 4
building medical office complex totaling 197,000 square
feet, with Phase I being a 3-story 54,000 square foot
medical office and ambulatory care center on 4 acres of
land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7),
located at the southwest side of Eucalyptus Street and
Red Oak Street - APN: 208-351-25.
NF:vc
Attachments
cc: Planning Commission/City Council
Commercial/Industri al
CONSENT CALENDAR ITE~4S AGENDA
july 2, 1987
1. DR 85-48 - GOLDEN WEST
(Nancy) Review of revised color sch~.
Committee Action: The Committee did not recommend for
approval as the colors scheme are too
bold.
2. DR 86-24 - SCHEU
(Chris) Review of color trade mrk.
Committee Action: The Committee accepted the accent
colors presented however preferred tht
building A use only blue tones and
building B use only green tones.
3. DR 86-32
'CCh"F~T' Review of roof materials
Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the materials
and approved them as submitted.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:00 - 6:30 Debra July 2, 1987
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-20 MODIFICATION - HIMES-PETERS ARCHITECTS - The
request to modify the approved color of three warehouse distribution
buildings totaling 237,519 square feet on 11.06 acres of land in the
General Industrial District (Subarea 13) located at the northwest corner
of 6th Street and Rochester Avenue - APN: 229-261-38 and 39.
Background:
This project was approved by the Planning Commission in October 1986.
The first phase of this project, Building "A" as shown in Exhibit A is
nearly completed construction. The owner and future occupant is
Lithonia Hi Tek Company, which is a manufacturer of lighting products.
This request for a color change was brought before the Committee on May
7, 1987 as a consent item, and the request was denied. The applicant
has formally applied for modification to the approved project for the
color change.
Staff Comments:
The approved building material/color sample palette includes a concrete
tilt-up type of structure painted gray with a sandblast concrete band
that is framed with an accent color band of royal blue (see Exhibit
"B"). The applicant and building owner now requests a modification in
the choice of accent color. In place of royal blue they would like to
use a burgundy shade. All other aspects of the building and
architecture remain unchanged.
Design Review Coe~eittee Action:
Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel
Staff Planner: Debra Meier
Applicant was directed to withdraw the application for modification to
the Development Review and work with staff in choosing a color of a
darker shade than what was presented to the Committee (Sinclair
SIN8802). The applicant should provide an on-site test panels for staff
review and approval prior to painting the building.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:30 - 7:00 Chris July 2, 1987
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-24 - PIER i IMPORTS,
WEST -A proposal to construct a 165,074 square foot warehouse/
~ribution building addition in the General Industrial District,
Subarea 11, on 18.8 acres of land located on the west side of Buffalo
Avenue, north of 6th Street - APN: 229-262-27.
Design Parameters:
The site has an existing 250,000 square foot warehouse facility (Phase
I) with vacant land towards the west. There is a considerable grade
change down from the finished grade of Phase I to the remaining vacant
portion of the site. The sites to the north and west are completed
warehousing facilities and the property south is vacant but with an
approved project of 3 R&D buildings.
Staff Coeanents:
1. The applicant proposes to continue the same building design,
materials, and colors as those used in Phase I. (Colored
pictures of Phase I building will be available for your review.)
2. The developer is proposing to replace the existing chain-link
fence and barbed wire with a continuous 8' high concrete tilt-up
wall for the entire length of the south property boundary for
screening the loading facility. This screen wall should be
painted to match the primary building color. Barbed wire shall
not be allowed on top of this concrete wall.
3. Should this 1,100 foot long concrete wall be designed with
decorative elements to break up its monotony?
4. The same landscape theme and density of materials should be
continued in front of this concrete wall.
Design Review Coemnit~e A~tion:
Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Larry McNiel
Staff Planner: Chris Westman
The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval with the
following conditions:
1. That gray accent bands identical to those found on Phase I be
provided on Phase II.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DR 87-24 - Pier i Imports, West
july 2, 1987
Page 2
2. The colors and materials for the screen wall along the south
property line should be coordinated with the main building.
3. In order to provide adequate height for screening at the
southwest corner of the site, a terraced landscaped area would be
appropriate. Detailed design should be subjected to City Planner
review and approval.
4. Adequate landscaping, to be determined by the City Planner,
should be provided along the south property line within the slope
easement.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 - 8:00 Nancy July 2, 1987
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-16 - NUWEST - The
deve)opment of an 8.2 acre integrated shopping center, consisting of
four buildings totaling 87,581 square feet in the General Commercial
District, located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and
Hellman Avenue - APN: 208-261-58.
Design Parameters:
The site is vacant with no significant vegetation. On April 2, 1987,
the Design Review Committee reviewed the conceptual site plan and
elevation, and provided the developer with preliminary comments in
assisting them to prepare for formal application process. Copy of the
Design Review Committee action comments have been attached for your
reference. The proposed site plan layout is essentially the same one as
reviewed by the Committee on April 2, 1987. However, the developer has
refined the site plan to address some of the Committee's comments by
providing a large centralized plaza area in front of retail "C"; a
strong pedestrian connection that loops within the site; and designing
the middle driveway on Foothill and Hellman Avenue as the main entrance
to the shopping center.
Staff Co.m.ents:
Site Plan
1. Per the recommendations of CalTrans, only one driveway will be
allowed on Foothill Boulevard where the existing driveway
adjacent to Taco Bell should be eliminated. The elimination of
this existing driveway on Foothill Boulevard would implement the
goals of the draft Foothill Specific Plan, in reducing vehicular
traffic conflict points, increase perception of safety, and
increase vehicular traffic capacity. However, the developers
should redesign this portion of the site plan to incorporate the
Taco Bell project as part of this shopping center. The purpose
is to insure that Taco Bell still has sufficient on-site and off-
site circulation within the shopping center. The developer has
been directed to contact the adjacent property owner, Taco Bell,
to inform them of this proposal to change the circulation for
this project.
2. According to the draft Foothill Specific Plan, the parking lot
should not be the dominant street scene along Foothill
Boulevard. With the elimination of the existing driveway on
Foothill Boulevard, an opportunity arises to re-orient pad "B" in
east/west direction, thus reducing the amount of parking area
fronting along Foothill Boulevard.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
CUP 87-16 - NUWEST
July 2, 1987
Page 2
3. The southerly driveway on Helms Avenue should be aligned with
Hampshire Street as directed by Design Review Committee on April
2, 1987.
4. The proposed location for the truck loading and service area
along retail building "D", shop #4, and retail "C" are
insufficient and could create traffic conflict.
5. The developer has provided a 12 foot wide open area with
trellises between shop #3 and retail "C" to provide pedestrian
connection to the rear parking area in encouraging its usage.
This pedestrian connection should be increased in width to
approximately 20' and should be provided with additional
amenities such as benches, and special landscaping treatment.
6. One hundred and one (101) parking spaces are being provided along
the rear property line which is approximately 24% of the total
required parking spaces. The building frontage along the rear
elevations is approximately 560' long. A through pedestrian
connection is 460' feet away from Hellman Avenue ~ich is
inadequate in encouraging rear parking lot usage. A driveway
connection should be provided through this rear parking lot area
for encouraging pedestrians to use the parking spaces between
retail "A" and shop #2.
7. Meandering pedestrian connections should be provided north of
retail "D".
8. Meandering pedestrian connection rather than straight should be
provided on the west side of the main driveway entrance from
Foothill Boulevard.
9. All pedestrian pathways and across circulation aisles should be
of textured treatment such as interlocking brick pavers, expose
aggregate, or a combination of both.
10. Trash enclosure areas should not be backing up to street
frontages such as on Helm Avenue and Hellman Avenue. All trash
enclosure areas, and any on-site utilities and equipment should
be located in inconspicuous areas, away from public view.
11. The existing stamped concrete textured pavement on the existing
driveway off Helms Avenue should be replaced with textured
material consistent with the shopping center.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
CUP 87-16 - NUWEST
July 2, 1987
Page 3
Architecture
The proposed elevations indicate a contemporary spanish theme with
covered arcades, curvilinear gables and towers. Retail Building "C"
with its larger curvilinear gable and being in front of a plaza area
appears to be the focal point of the project. However, the elevations
of the project could be improved with the following:
1. Variation to the tower treatment should be provided by
delineating towers at project entrances and/or at edges of site
area to be the more dominant ones with a consistent design. Such
design could be of larger and taller towers with openings.
2. Additional architectural elements and details such as stucco
detail around columns and arches, wood rafters, arbors, impost
molding, cornice, generous roof overhand, stacking of roof tile,
etc. should be provided.
3. Elevations that abut street frontages should be upgraded with
additional architectural elements and details such as adding
arched windows at building corners, fake recessed arched wood
doors, arcaded cornice, etc. and with special landscape
treatment. Such mentioned detail should be provided to the west
elevations of Pad A, shop ~1, and Retail A including the side
elevation, and the east and north elevations of Retail D.
4. The proposed rear elevation from retail building "A" through
retail building "C" does not provide for vertical variation.
This rear elevation should also be upgraded with additional
architectural detailing such as stucco over around pilaster
around back exit door, impost molding, etc.
5. Building pads "A" and "B" should orient their public entrances
toward Foothill Boulevard with pedestrian spaces created to
compliment these public entrances through adding awnings,
trellis/arbor work and special landscaping.
6. Additional trellis work, benches, pedestrian amenities and
special landscaping should be provided within plaza areas
consistent with the draft Foothill Specific Plan.
7. The proposed store front consists of straight glass windows which
is discourage in the draft Foothill Specific Plan. Arched
windows, multi-pane design and a variety of store front designs
should be provided.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
CUP 87-16 - NUWEST
July 2, 1987
Page 4
Landscaping
1. Significantly greater amount of trees as well as increased number
of box size trees should be planted along Foothill Boulevard.
The reason being that there is a 7-8 foot grade difference from
the top of the curb to the parking area and in a 2:1 slope with a
flood wall of 3' high where 15-gallon size trees, ground cover
and shrubs may not be seen if planted within the slope area.
2. According to the draft Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, this
stretch of Foothill Boulevard is considered as the suburban
parkway where the landscape treatment should be dominated by
informal clustering of London Plane Tree, California Sycamore and
Purple Plum tree. Other parkway characteristics include rolling
turf berms, meandering undulating sidewalk, and hardscape to
compliment this informal 1 andscape to compliment this informal
landscape treatment.
3. Increased number of trees and box size trees should also be
planted along Hellman Avenue to make up of the lost landscaping
within the public right-of-way consisting of 12 foot wide
sidewalk and a 3 foot high flood wall. Landscape mound should be
provided up to the 3 foot high flood wall.
4. Within plaza area, special landscape treatment such as accent
trees, specimen size trees, and an increased number of trees
should be provided.
5. Dense landscaping should be provided along the entire south
property boundary with double row of shrubs, 5-gallon size and
planted at 3 feet on center and with the appropriate ground
cover.
6. All walls such as flood walls, retaining walls, screen walls
should be of decorative design consistent with the architectural
style.
Signs
Taco Bell has an existing monument sign at the corner of Helms Avenue
and Foothill Boulevard. This monument sign is considered to be a
temporary one based on the purchase agreement between Taco Bell and the
previous landowner Lewis Homes, which states that the existing monument
sign will be removed at such time when the shopping center monument sign
is to be constructed. The developer should contact the owner of Taco
Bell indicating such requirement.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
CUP 87~16 - NUWEST
July 2, 1987
Page 5
Lighting
Site and building light fixtures should have a design that compliments
the architectural style
Design Review C~ittee Action:
Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel
Staff Planner: Nancy Fong
The Committee reviewed the proposed project and recommended that it be
revised for further Committee review as follows:
Site Plan
1. Only one driveway will be allowed on Foothill Boulevard where the
existing driveway adjacent to Taco Bell should be eliminated.
The elimination of this existing driveway on Foothill Boulevard
would implement the goals of the draft Foothill Specific Plan, in
reducing vehicular traffic conflict points, increase perception
of safety, and increase vehicular traffic capacity. The
developers should redesign this portion of the site plan to
incorporate the Taco Bell still has sufficient on-site and off-
site circulation including sufficient stacking distance within
the shopping center. This issue must be resolved prior to
scheduling the project for Planning Commission review.
2. Parking lot should not be the dominant street scene along
Foothill Boulevard. With the elimination of the existing
driveway on Foothill Boulevard, an opportunity arises to re-
orient pad "B" in east/west direction, thus reducing the amount
of parking area fronting along Foothill Boulevard.
3. Three driveways along Helms Avenue is acceptable with conditions
that speed bumps be provided along the entire rear service drive.
4. The pedestrian connection between shop ~3 and retail C should be
flared out at the southern ends and provided with additional
amenities such as benches and special landscape treatment.
B. A pedestrian connection similar to the one between shop #3 and
retail C and as mentioned above should be provided between retail
A and shop #2.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
CUP 87-16 - NUWEST
July 2, 1987
Page 6
6. All pedestrian pathways and across circulation aisles should be
of textured treatment such as interlocking brick paver, exposed
aggregate, or a combination of both.
7. Terraced decorative wall be added to trash enclosure areas that
back up to street frontages on Helm Avenue and Hellman Avenue.
8. The existing stamped concrete textured pavement in the existing
driveway off Helms Avenue should be replaced with textured
material consistent with the shopping center.
Architecture
1. Additional architectural details such as random stacking of roof
tile, generous roof overhang and a range of roof tile color
should be provided.
2. Elevations that abut street frontages should be upgraded with
additional architectural elements and details such as adding
arched windows at building corners, fake recessed arched wood
doors, arcaded cornice, etc. and with special landscape
treatment. Such mentioned detail should be provided to the west
elevations of pad A, shop ~1, and retail A including the side
elevation, and the east and north elevations of retail D.
3. The proposed rear elevation from retail building A through retail
building C does not provide for vertical variation. This rear
elevation should also be upgraded with additional architectural
detailing such as stucco over around pilaster around back exit
door, impost molding, etc.
4. Building pads A and B should orient their public entrances toward
Foothill Boulevard with pedestrian spaces created to compliment
these public entrances through adding awnings, trellis/arbor work
and special landscaping.
5. Additional trellis work, benches, pedestrian amenities and
special landscaping should be provided within plaza areas
consistent with the draft Foothill Specific Plan.
6. The proposed store front consists of straight glass windows which
is discouraged in the draft Foothill Specific Plan. Arched
windows, multi-pane design and a variety of store front designs
should be provided.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
CUP 87-16 - NUWEST
July 2, 1987
Page 7
Landscaping
1. Significantly greater amount of trees as well as increased number
of box size trees should be planted along Foothill Boulevard.
The reason being that there is a 7-8 foot grade difference from
the top of the curb to the parking area and in a 2:1 slope with a
flood wall of 3 feet high are 15-gallon size trees, ground cover
and shrubs may not be seen if planted within the slope area.
2. According to the draft Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, this
stretch of Foothill Boulevard is considered as the suburban
parkway where the landscape treatment should be dominated by
informal clustering of London Plane Tree, California Sycamore and
Purple Plum tree. Other parkway characteristics include rolling
turf berms, meandering undulating sidewalk, and hardscape to
compliment this informal landscape treatment.
3. Increased number of trees and box size trees should also be
planted along Hellman Avenue to make up of the landscaping within
the public right-of-way consisting of 12 foot wide sidewalk and a
3 foot high flood wall. Landscape mound should be provided up to
the 3 foot high flood wall.
4. Within plaza area, special landscape treatment such as accent
trees, specimen size trees, and an increased number of trees
should be provided.
5. Dense landscaping should be provided along the entire south
property boundary with double row of shrubs, 5~gallon size and
planted at 3 feet on center and with the appropriate ground
Cover.
6. All walls such as flood walls, retaining walls, screen walls
should be of decorative design consistent with the architectural
style.
Signs
Taco Bell has an existing monument sign at the corner of Helms Avenue
and Foothill Boulevard. This monument sign is considered to be a
temporary one based on the purchase agreement between Taco Bell and the
previous landowner Lewis Homes, which states that the existing monument
sign will be removed at such time when the shopping center monument sign
is to be constructed. The developer should contact the owner of Taco
Bell indicating such requirement.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
CUP 87-16 - NUWEST
July 2, 1987
Page 8
Li ghti ng
Site and building light fixtures should have a design that compliments
the architectural style
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
9:00 - 9:30 Chris July 2, 1987
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-04 - TOWER PARTNERS (EDWARD'S CINEMA) - A request
to modify the approved elevations by substituting an arbor along the
north and south elevations for a 3/4 inch reveal for a theatre located
at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN:
1077-104-1, 3.
Background:
The proposal to construct an arbor was a result of discussion at the
January 28, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. The applicant requested
that the requirement of a reveal be deleted from the side and rear
elevations of the theater since a tool joint groove was already in place
and that the tool joint groove served the same end as the required
reveal.
The Commission felt that the tool joint groove was inadequate and
required the applicant to develop other alternatives.
Design Review Committee A~tion:
Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Chris Westman
The Committee reviewed the proposed arbor and directed the applicant to
redesign using materials (sonotube and wood) that are consistent with
the existing arbors in the Virginia Dare Business Center.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
9:30 - 11:00 Nancy July 2, 1987
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-25 - BARTON - The
development of 39.39 acre mixed use Master Plan consisting of 14 acres
Medical Office and 25.39 acres Administrative/professional Office in the
Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located on the north side of Utica
Avenue between White Oak Street and Red Oak Street - APN: 208-351-25
and 26. Related to this project is the request to amend the Rancho
Cucamonga Business Park Master Plan by redesignating the subject site
from Corporate Plaza to Medical Office and Administrative/Professional
Office, and the deletion of the public street connection through the
site area.
.ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-17
B/~RTDN/CONTINENTAL HEALTH - The development of a 4 building medical
office complex totaling 197,000 square feet, with Phase I being a 3-
story 54,000 square foot medical office and ambulatory care center on 4
acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at
the southwest side of Eucalyptus Street and Red Oak Street - APN: 208-
351-25.
Background:
The Committee reviewed the above projects on June 18, 1987 regular
meeting and directed the applicant to submit revised plan for further
review at July 2, 1987 meeting.
Design Review Cmittee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Suzanne Chitlea
Staff Planner: Nancy Fong
The Committee reviewed the revised 39 acre Master Plan and determined
that the Master Plan concept is acceptable. However, it should address
the following concerns with future submittal of development review of
any phase development (excluding the 14 acre medical master site plan):
1. Provide a pedestrian environment through the use of plazas and
walkways that should be integrated into the overall land use
design.
2. Convenient pedestrian walkways should be provided to link parking
area, buildings and pedestrian open space.
3. Provide a strong interior vehicular circulation that strengthens
the integration of the Master Plan layout and effective travel
pattern.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DR 87-25 - Barton
July 2, 1987
Page 2
4. Building orientation, site layout and building forms should
include consideration of wind protection.
The Committee also reviewed the revised southeast elevation of Phase I
medical office that showed a more dominant entrance statement through
the extension of the columns to the second story. The Committee
recommended approval of the southeast elevation. The Committee reviewed
staff's recommendation of the final design for Phase I main driveway as
shown in attachment A, and recommended it to the developer. The
developer agreed to this design.
RED .OAK STREET