HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/04/07 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 20, 1988 A~TION AI~ENDA
TO: ~i al/Industri al
Design Review Co~ittee Peter Tolstoy
Larry McNiel
Dan Col eman
David Blakesley (Alternate)
FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF APRIL 7, 1988
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
(Chris) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-19 - PARCO - A modification to
an approved Site Plan for a 35,700 square foot
neighborhood retail center on 3.25 acres of land located
at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Ramona
Avenue in Subarea 3 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific
Plan, Community Commercial District - APN: 208-305-15,
16, and 17.
6:30 - 7:30
Chris ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-04 -
CARNEY-THEODOROU - The development of 11.98 acres of
Industrial Park Master Plan consisting of 8 buildings
totaling 165,700 square feet in the Industrial Park and
Haven Avenue Overlay Districts located at the southeast
corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Route - APN: 209-142-
17.
NF:te
Attachments
cc: Planning Commission/City Council
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
CONSENT CALENDAR IIEMSAGENDA
APRIL 7, 1988
1. ffi)R86-34 - CARL'S JR.
(Chris) Review of proposed awning colors.
Committee Action: Approved as submitted.
2. DR 87-26 MODIFICATION
(Greg) Review of minor changes to Site Plan
in shifting drive aisle and building,
and changes to color sch~.
Committee Action: The Committee approved the proposed
changes to the Site Plan and on-site
planter configurations. The proposed
color scheme and spandrel glass
applications were also approved,
however, the Committee stated that the
glass material should relate directly
to the modified building colors.
3. CUP 88-03 - NALBANDIAR
(Nancy) Preliminary review of proposed concept
of Site Plan.
Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the concept of
a pre-school at Base Line Road west of
the proposed retail center. The
Committee stated that this location
created a traffic conflict between the
different land uses.
4. CUP 87-17 - ClKS
(Nancy) Review of minor change to the Site
Plan for Phase I development,
Committee Action: The Committee approved the shift in
the building orientation.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:00 - 6:30 Chris April 7, 1988
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86-19 PARCO - A modification to an approved
Site Plan for a 35,700 square foot neighborhood retail center on 3.25
acres of land located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and
Ramona Avenue in Subarea 3 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan,
Community Commercial District - APN: 208-305-15, 16, and 17.
Background:
The project was originally approved on August 14, lg85, prior to the
approval of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. A one-year time
extension was approved by the Planning Commission in November, 1987.
The modification being proposed is a reconfiguration of the eastern end
of the building to create a satellite pad. Attachments "A" and "B" are
copies of the previously approved Site Plan and the proposed one for
your reference. Staff will be reviewing this modification according to
the current standards of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. The
applicant also has submitted a variance application to exceed height and
setback limitations.
Staff Coneents:
A. Site Plan:
1. The proposed site modification reflects the design guidelines
of the Foothill Plan more closely than the original concept and
provides for a simpler, more logical interna] circulation
pattern.
2. Two mini plazas have been eliminated from the site. They
should be reincorporated into the site. It would be
appropriate to locate one at the eastern end of the main
building and the other adjacent to the satellite building.
B. Elevations:
1. The original monochromatic color scheme has been proposed to
incorporate accent colors. Staff has a concern with the bold
use of co]ors and wou]d ask the Committee to make an eva]uation
of these proposed colors.
2. The elevations on the proposed bui]ding (2A) are generally
consistent with the overall center's architectural theme.
However, the balance and focus of the east wing seem out of
place. The east end shou]d have an element that acts as an
anchor, however should not be as dominant as the main entry
element.
DESIGN REVIEW CO.MM~S
CUP 85-19 - PARCO
April 7, 1988
Pa9e 2
3. The open trellis element found on the original proposal should
be consistent throughout the project.
4. Consideration should be give to parapet walls and how they are
terminated. All parapets should have returns which would
eliminate the "false facade" look.
Design Review Comeittee Action:
Members Present: David Blakesley, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Col eman
Staff Planner: Chris Westman
The Committee reviewed the proposed modifications and made the following
recommendations:
1. Plaza areas similar to the original proposal should be
provided at the eastern end of the main building and at
the satellite building (refer to Attachment "B").
Pedestrian furniture and trash receptacles must be
used. The design of these plazas should be reviewed by
the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of
building permits.
2. The final color scheme must be reviewed and approved by
the Design Review Committee prior to occupancy of any
buildings.
3. The tower elements should be lowered and the eastern
tower element de-emphasized in order to maintain the
westernmost of the two as the centers main entrance
focus.
4. The arches and trellis feature should be continued at the
eastern end of the main building and at the satellite
building.
5. The Committee preferred that the rectangular window
element be continued onto the north elevations of the
satellite building (No. 3) and Building No. 1.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:30 - 7:00 Chris April 7, 1988
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-04 - CARNEY-
THEODOROU The development of 11.98 acres of Industrial Park
~an consisting of 8 buildings totaling 165,700 square feet
in the Industrial Park and Haven Avenue Overlay Districts located
at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Route - APN:
209-142-17.
Oesign Parameters:
The site is generally flat, has a 2 percent slope to the south,
and has no significant vegetation. A Master Plan concept was
approved with the existing Haven Tech Center south of the project
site. Attached for your reference is a copy of the previously
approved Master Plan concept. At the northwest corner is an out-
parcel where staff recently received a proposal for a five-story
office building with two levels of subterranean parking. The
design of this proposed Master Plan must integrate the design of
the out-parcel with an emphasis on circulation and the existing
and future improvements to the south.
Staff Comaants:
Master Plan/Detailed Site Plan:
Staff's main concern is how well the proposed Site Plan addresses
the concepts approved with the original Master Plan and how it
relates to adjoining proposals and existing developments.
1. A central circulation spine is a strong element of the
original Master Plan. The proposal addresses that conceptual
element, however, it could be strengthened by eliminating
some parking aisle entries which will separate the parking
from the spine more effectively.
2. The portion of the circulation spine southeast of the "out-
parcel" does not provide for a smooth transition with its
awkward alignment and the "pin-head" shaped landscape planter
which could create a traffic conflict. This portion should
be redesigned and to be integrated with the circulation
design for the "out parcel."
3. The Master Plan boundary must include the existing Haven Tech
Center to the south.
4. The shared driveway and the on-site circulation at the south
property boundary between the project site and Haven Tech
Center should be improved to provide for better integration.
April 7, 1988
Page 2
5. As a related technical item, the drive aisles and joint
access at the southeast corner of the out parcel must be
properly coordinated. The final design of the adjoining
project has not been determined and will have bearing on the
design of this project.
6. The Master Plan shows strong potential for an integrated
pedestrian pathway system with the exception of the out
parcel at the northwest corner and the existing coordination
with the adjacent projects should provide that link.
7. A portion of the plaza area for Haven Tech has been completed
according to the previous approved Master Plan. The design
of the plaza area and pedestrian connection for this project
along the south property boundary must integrate the existing
half of the plaza so as to achieve a completeness and
continuity.
8. Textured paving should be used at all points of pedestrian
crossing over drive aisles and all pedestrian walkways.
g. The north and south service entrances at the southeast side
of the site should be narrowed to the minimum access width,
the landscape area increased, and screen walls provided for
the single story industrial buildings on Utica.
Architecture:
1. The elevations of the two three-story buildings along Haven
Avenue with its building design, the articulation of building
plane and use of granite and glass materials meet the Haven
Avenue Overlay District.
2. The exterior material used on the two-story buildings on
Arrow Route should be reflective and compatible with the
granite proposed for the buildings along Haven Avenue.
3. On the north and south sides of the midrise buildings on
Arrow Route, vertical mullions should continue up to the top
of the half circle element versus leaving them open.
4. The large windows should be broken into multi-pane windows in
order to continue the rhythm set by the other windows on the
buildings along Arrow Route.
5. The parapet reveal on the single story industrial buildings
should be continuous on all sides.
April 7, 1988
Page 3
Landscaping:
1. Enlargement of the plaza areas should be provided for
review. These plaza areas should be designed with a special
landscaping scheme including pedestrian amenities.
2. The landscape scheme for the entire Master Plan boundary
should consider wind mitigation.
3. The 10 foot landscape planter along the north side of the
northerly three-story building and the south side of the
southerly three-story building may not have the necessary
width to break up the massing of the buildings. An
alternative to increasing the width of this planter is to
provide terrace planter wall or to provide mature trees.
Design Review Cm~nittee Action:
Members Present: David Blakesley, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Chris Westman
The Committee reviewed the Master Plan proposal and architectural
elevations and made the following recommendations to be forwarded to the
Planning Commission.
Site Plan:
1. The final design of the parking lot circulation, the
alignment of the main circulation spine and how it
interfaces with the "not-a-part" parcel should be subject
to City Planner and City Engineer review and approval.
2. Two of the parking aisle entrances at the main spine
should be closed to strengthen it.
3. The design of the plaza area and pedestrian connection
for this project along the south property boundary must
integrate the existing half of the plaza so as to achieve
a completeness and continuity. Final design should be
subject to City Planner review and approval.
4. Textured paving should be consistent and used at all
crosswalks and pedestrian walkways.
5. The service entry drives at Buildings "E" and "F" should
be narrowed and incorporate additional landscape area as
shown on the attachment.
April 7, 1988
Page 4
6. An area adequate as a turn around space should be
provided at the west ends of the east/west parking rows
by Buildings "A" and "B".
Architecture:
1. Samples of all of the proposed materials for the project
shall be submitted to the Design Review Committee for
review and approval prior to the issuance of any building
permits.
2. Multi-pane windows should be used on Buildings "C" and
3. The parapet reveal on Buildings "E" and "F" should be a
continuous 360 degrees.
4. Mitigation should be considered for wind at the entries
of the office buildings. Sliding doors and/or vestibules
could be considered.
Landscape:
1. Enlarged details of all pedestrian spaces should be
submitted for review and approval by the Design Review
Committee prior to the issuance of any building permits.
2. The landscape theme for the entire Master Plan should
consider wind mitigation.
3. Terraced planter walls, mature trees, and/or other
measures should be provided at the north side of Building
"B" and south side of Building "A".
ARROW AVENUE
' ~'~ LI
~ ~fl ~111. .
II I rll
-'nuu'~ "r
c..~
LIIII_IT)
76202
_. ,~ -, _.~ _-, ,-